Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 95 (8883 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 01-16-2019 3:19 AM
185 online now:
PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat), Pressie, Tangle (4 members, 181 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: candle2
Happy Birthday: paradigm of types
Post Volume:
Total: 845,762 Year: 799/19,786 Month: 799/1,731 Week: 156/438 Day: 1/32 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   The God Hypothesis
Spiritual Anarchist
Member (Idle past 1560 days)
Posts: 70
From: Raleigh NC
Joined: 01-27-2013

Message 1 of 2 (689683)
02-02-2013 8:41 PM

When referring to God or gods most of the time we are referring to a historical idea of a supreme being usually supernatural in nature.

In the ID debate most understandings of the God Concept directly relate to the Mythological Construct of Canaanite Tribal Deities which was absorbed into the Judaism Pantheon. Like the Greeks and the Egyptians there were politically motivated movements to Dynasties or Kingdoms through the Monotheistic Concept. Wherein the idea of One God was not so much revealed as it was invented. And was not so much revealed as a spiritual undertaking but invented as a convenient political form of mind control.

By the time Christianity is well under way this is clearly indicated by the methods used. Such as absorbing the pagan ideas and then eliminating the competition through Inquisitions and Crusades etc. Also in hiding that Elohim means gods and so essentially hiding both the Pagan and Polytheistic origins of all the dominate Monotheistic Religions of today.

Deism and Gnosticism were split offs revealing the real nature of religion as an insincere branch of Metaphysics that follows none of the logic or even the honest inquiry of true Metaphysics.

So a God Hypothesis can not really be postulated from the Apologetics of some Theology when Theology itself is based on Mythological Constructs. Mythology itself is a creative process. But Mythological Constructs are plagiarism of god concepts and creation stories from other cultures to create the un natural and pseudo concepts needed for Monotheism based on A Trinity. The Trinity being the leftovers of trying to appease the Pagan Polytheist .

So what I am saying is this particular God Hypothesis is the one that Atheist can easily refute and is the reason why I refer to myself as an Atheist 90% of the time.

I think that The Discovery Institute includes The God Hypothesis
that states the Judaeo-Christian God Designed the Universe. In their God Hypothesis this "God" is a person. And this person has wants and needs and anger and jealousy. This person is described in their holy books. Their God Hypothesis is that of a Creator God that creates the Universe and Earth all at once as stated in Genesis.

Two problems are immediate. One Genesis is a clear plagiarism of Babylonian creation stories and two the word "Design" is a smokescreen for Creationism.

So to clarify to accept any God Hypothesis we would have to reject all the Mythological Constructs and all the Political motivations or goals of movements based on them. This would be essentially be rejecting the whole ID movements as it stands today.

Any God Hypothesis would have to redefine God outside of Mythological Constructs completely.

No self respecting Atheist is going to accept a Mythological Construct as an explanation to fill in the gaps of Evolution.If this is the essence of ID then ID is a dead fish.

First of all we must define what "God" could possibly describe by eliminating from The God Hypothesis all aspects of a Mythological Construct as I have made clear.

If God is inside our Universe like you and I are "inside" our Universe then this "God" can not be a creator of the Universe and any attempt to explain our Universe as "designed" would lead to a God Hypothesis that includes a "God that "designed" himself.

Which brings me to my next point. A God Hypothesis that carries any weight must not be one that describes "God" as a person.

If God is "outside" our Universe it must be established where or when such a Phenomena occurs. Is this a Spatial Temporal Being? If so how can we postulate such a being "Outside" our Universe when we do not know of anything in Physics that qualifies as "outside" our Universe?

If we live in a Multiverse this just further complicates the problem in a God Hypothesis.

Now you can stipulate that Aliens are the Architects of Design. But what did they design? The whole Universe as we know it? Or Just the Earth? Or did they just tinker with the process? By not clarifying whether the higher beings are "gods" or aliens you have a very weak argument for any form of ID.

First of all it is disingenuous or insincere at its core to even bring aliens into ID because most of the ID movement justifies all their agendas based on a moral imperative of eliminating Philosophic Materialism which is clearly not the case when postulating seeding or genetic tampering by alien races.

So why have a God Hypothesis at all? As an Atheist myself I can not tell you. But as you know most atheist are fairly agnostic when pressed with Einsteins God or God Hypothesis outside Mythological Constructs.

If any form of Pantheism is true then God is not "outside" the Universe or "inside" the Universe. But IS the Universe.

My God Hypothesis is that although the Atheist are right in asserting that if God IS the Universe then we do not necessarily need another word for Universe ...I still think that the Hard Problem of Consciousness and the Measurement Problem in Quantum Physics are actually two sides of the same question which leave room for a God Hypothesis.

The missing variable not accounted for in both is "Awareness".

Not Intelligence but Awareness is The Source of all that is that we call our Universe and is what makes Consciousness possible. The Quantum Flux is the Ground of Our Being and the Source of Creativity that generates a Living Universe as opposed to dead objects just floating in space.

The reason life is possible and human beings as well as other sentient beings are possible which can both experience pain and love and are capable of creativity themselves is because we are God.

How can you scientifically prove such a Hypothesis?

Well although I can not "prove " my God Hypothesis I am willing to lay out the groundwork.

Starting with some observations.

An obvious observation is that I am an aware being and so are you and no amount of explaining can justify or establish consciousness of aware beings as an illusion. Our awareness is a self evident fact that comes from direct observation. I do not need "I think therefore I am" . I am well aware of my awareness independent of thoughts. Awareness is in no way dependent on thoughts or thinking.

Another observation is I am not the only aware being. Sorry Solipsist.
All living creatures on this Earth are self evidently aware.

Another observation is that it is the "boundaries" that we place on awareness that are "illusion" not the awareness itself. When I see myself as "separate" from you or "separate" from other life on Earth I am accepting artificial boundaries.

I have made great attempts in eliminating the automatic acceptance of these boundaries and have discovered it is possible to observe awareness without boundaries.

This is like becoming aware that you are not just the finger you cut as you slowly resolve the problem of pain. You treat the problem of the cut finger by becoming aware of external objects and acknowledging that you "have" a finger that is cut. You are "not" the finger itself thought it is "part" of you. Without this essential awareness of the nature of yourself as a whole body you could not begin to address the problem. You must use your other hand and also your entire body. You may even have to acknowledge other beings who also have whole bodies.

My point is here how do you know that you are just your body when it is obvious you are not just your finger. If you do not draw the line at the boundary of I am "my finger" why draw the line at I am "my body"?

Which leads into my next point.

From this experience it might occur to you that these other beings might be part of your being as well.

I could go on but I want to make clear where my God Hypothesis has come from and to differentiate my Hypothesis from Mythological Constructs.

With the Help of scientists such as Benjamin Libet Einstein and Fred Alan Wolf to name a few the observations necessary to validate this as a viable hypothesis are within reach. And yet I think science by itself is not enough. A Metaphysics would have to be developed and continually be refined.

If my Hypothesis could be developed at all and that is a big "If" it would go a long way to refuting completely the religion of bot Materialism and Theology as complete in themselves explanations of all that there is. If this is not possible I would love to hear of other God Hypothesis that do a better job.

Perhaps a God Hypothesis is not even necessary in any shape or form?
If this is the case I would love to hear the competing Hypothesis on the relation or lack there of between The Hard Problem of Consciousness and The Measurement Problem in QM. I also would be interested in better Hypothesis that address the other problems of Metaphysics.

An Atheist that puts their head in the sand claiming there are no problems or impasses between Metaphysics and Branches of Science are no better than the Theologians that claim there are no real Theological Problems of the God Concepts that imply their religion is based solely on Mythological Constructs.

Perhaps when we die we cease to have any meaningful existence beyond a biological machine. Or perhaps we all go to Hell because we can not correctly answer the question of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. In either case pascals wager is moot.

But if there is any meaning in life beyond simply accepting suffering as a built in system to life that simply appeared for no further purpose then to survive..and then suffer and cause others to suffer ...while struggling... And all this only to die... claiming to know the answer... but then actually resolving nothing in the process seems to me the path of the Nihilist.

If we want to see if there might actually be an alternative then maybe ...we should examine other hypothesis with a little more discipline in honest inquiry that marks the true philosopher.

We may have nothing to gain but given that this is all assumed to be meaningless outside any subjective meaning we assign to life we certainly have nothing to lose.

Edited by Spiritual Anarchist, : Clarity

My Karma Ran Over My Dogma

Posts: 12571
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.3

Message 2 of 2 (689693)
02-03-2013 7:28 AM

Thread Copied to Creation/Evolution Miscellany Forum
Thread copied to the The God Hypothesis thread in the Creation/Evolution Miscellany forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019