Skip to main content

God

"For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." - Matthew 18:20
I am not Christian or theist as it is commonly understood.

However, all people are theists, because God/god is a person's introverted reification of community expectations for behaviour and inter-subjective understanding of our world. If that doesn't make sense, let me explain:

- God does not need to be called "God", Allah, etc., or known through anthropocentric metaphor for it to exist. I use "God" only as shorthand. It does not need to be associated with any religion.
- God is a projection of the human brain, like numbers, space and shape. You can't help but believe in God. Everyone is a theist.
- God arises out of an individuals interaction with a community. The concept is used to explain the workings of the world and morality.

Am I equating 'nature' with God? Yes, absolutely. A so called 'athiest' would be unable to communicate about the material world and moral behaviour without referring to 'nature' - although they could call "nature" something else.

Athiest: "But I see nature as something materialistic, not some old man with a white beard in the sky".
Me: "Old man in the sky" is idolatry, so good on you. You are most pious, friend.

Christians and others have talked about knowing God through his creation. You may reject this dualism and the metaphor of God as a man/father. But you have to realise these are metaphors which people found to have great explanatory value in the past. They didn't have our science and empiricism to explain things, so it was perfectly reason them to use anthropocentric metaphors to explain things. My contention is that these metaphors are pointing to the same thing that 'nature' and science points to. Of course the metaphors aren't 'real', they're metaphors! However people have in the past reified these metaphors - which was actually a form of idolatry. Such reification cannot be maintained intellectually anymore, but that does not mean the metaphors and what they point to can't, because they can, just as people talk about 'nature' without being mocked as backward idiots.

So I've destroyed the fedora-wearing retards, but what about morality - how does God or nature fit into that? In the context of morality, God refers to community expectations which have been idealistically separated from the community in order to enhance their status and protect them from societal critique (in the past, that protection doesn't work much nowadays).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Multiculturalism is responsible for every war in history (almost)

people informally segregate all the time. You will find various ethnic enclaves in Melbourne and Sydney. Ethnocentric in-group preference is also seen in choice of friends and communication levels among work colleagues of different ethnic backgrounds. While there may be enough tolerance to allow semi-deracinated individuals to participate in capitalism and consumerism, the reality is that in-group preference is innate and Multiculturalism/diversity should be avoided a much as possible, because it breaks down social cohesion and trust. Diversity is our greatest weakness - an observable, scientific reality (footnote: Robert Putnam). Remember that forced integration has lead to many conflicts in the 20th and 21st century. WWI and Hitler would not have happened if various ethnic groups had sovereignty rather than being under the thumb of oppressive empires. Iraq and Israel/Palestine are two current examples of Multicultural conflicts. There is widespread revolt against forced integrati...
Post a Comment
Read more

How Liberalism enslaves

Aristotle, the Stoics and other ancient Greco-Roman moralists posit a very different idea of 'freedom' that involves combating the tendencies that divert us from human flourishing and contributing to our community as social animals. It is naturalistic, albeit pre-Darwinist, but it is not dogmatic like Liberalism, Leftism, etc. This ancient teach us what freedom really is, and Stoic practices in particular can inculcate an honest sense of autonomy. Liberalism claims to grant people autonomy but it only gives them a false sense of it. It effectively enslaves people to denial of their biology, hedonistic consumerism, keeping up with the Jones', seeking celebrity, lower quality social and family relations, workplace and other forms of alienation, pursuit of happiness in all the wrong places: career, travel, shiny things, sleeping around, taking drugs, etc. Liberalism won't necessarily lead to all these things, but it makes people vulnerable to their marketing, and being h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Equality, Liberalism and the Big State

Shelley makes Liberalism sounds as idealistic and Utopian as any religion. I even see some parallels with the Sermon on the Mount. What is the relation between 'equality' and the 'individual'. (I don't think we are equal and my reification of the 'individual' has become weaker lately). Must one have a strong view of equality to have a strong view of the individual and their 'rights'? I think so, although those regimes pushing equality the strongest - the Communists - have ended up being the most hierarchical and totalitarian of all, with the State on top and the plebs below. Equality ends ups sacrificing individual 'rights' for the sake of whatever new set of individual 'rights' are trendy at the time. e.g. we need to pretend that homosexual relationships are equal to heterosexual ones therefore our 'free speech' right is sacrificed so as to protect the new 'freedom from hurt feelings' right of another. New indiv...
Post a Comment
Read more