The Invention Of Moral Narrative

Engages Aeon's 'Good Guy/Bad Guy Myth' (modern epics are good-vs-evil; pre-1700 stories like the Iliad and Mahabharata weren't; the article blames nationalism). Scott pushes back: the empirical claim is shaky (Robin Hood, the Bible, Crusades, Zoroastrianism); and the nationalism explanation is backwards — ancient amoral loyalty (Achilles fights for Greece because he's Greek) is MORE nationalist than modern celebrated principled betrayal (Vader, Snape, Avatar). He offers alternatives: democratization (warrior virtues -> populist virtues), widening moral circles, and — the most interesting — good-vs-evil stories as a memetically superior form that took ~1500 years to perfect (the Coca-Cola-vs-yak's-milk analogy), tied to his puzzlement at Christianity's rapid, often-peaceful spread (it was 'just really appealing'). The deep parallel: Iliad<->paganism (fight for your side) vs. Harry Potter<->Christianity (fight for good; Harry as a weak, fated, love-powered Christ-figure), with Tolkien/Lewis consciously translating Christianity into narrative form.

Quality 76 · Excellent. A sharp, original cultural-history essay — the nationalism-is-backwards critique and the good-vs-evil-as-memetic-innovation / Christianity-narrative-parallel framing are genuinely interesting and connect to his civil-religion themes. Excellent-low.

Claude’s paradigm shift 58 · Moderate. The memetic-superiority account of good-vs-evil narrative, plus the Iliad/paganism vs. Potter/Christianity structural parallel, is a fresh, memorable contribution. Notable.

Real-world impact 2 · Minor. A within-discourse cultural-history essay; no material-world effect. Within-blog influence.