There Are Rules Here

Why do strict religions thrive while liberal Protestantism dies? Via Iannaccone/Irons/Sosis: costly, seemingly-arbitrary demands (no electricity, no caffeine, tithing) are 'hard-to-fake symbols of commitment' that screen out the half-committed, leaving a stronger core and a more valuable community — a growth feedback loop. Scott applies this to atheist religion-substitutes: the Ethical Culture Society and Sunday Assembly (whose toothless 'Ten Commandments' read more like a Bill of Rights, impossible to sin against) keep failing because they're hostile to placing real rules on members, whereas Giving What We Can's binding 10% pledge is the one genuinely-demanding, genuinely-sanctifying secular group. Floats the 'nomic' (rule-based opt-in subculture) as an Archipelago building block. Insightful.

Quality 67 · Strong. Strong (67): a memorable, well-applied synthesis (costly signaling explains religious vitality, and its absence explains why secular substitutes fail); held mid-Strong as an application of Iannaccone's framework rather than an original theory.

Claude’s paradigm shift 48 · Moderate. Moderate (48): the atheist-substitutes-lack-rules extension and the 'nomic' framing are a fresh angle on an existing model.

Real-world impact 3 · Moderate. Moderate (3): the hard-to-fake-commitment / rules-build-community framing circulates in rationalist community-building discussion; niche footprint.