NEXT BACK

Philosophical musings on Quanta & Qualia;  Materialism & Spiritualism; Science & Religion; Pragmatism & Idealism, etc.


Next (right) Forum                  WELCOME PAGE Recent Posts

This could take
some time

Taking the Measure of God

Post 13. 02/01/2018 continued  . . .

Deism vs Atheism

Is This a Designer Universe?

However, another path of Logic assumes that the most important aspect of reality to non-scientists is personal Consciousness — the essence of humanity — which can't be adequately explained as the output of material mechanisms. So the most reasonable candidate for the source of such noumenal Qualia would be a creative mind of some kind : Mind makes minds. That's why most thinkers, until recently, have imagined their hypothetical uber-mind in allegorical terms of a bigger & better human awareness. Unfortunately, that reasonable supposition included some extra baggage in the form of human emotions that are inherent functions of the physical human body, and may not apply to discarnate spiritual entities. Which is why most philosophers, not concerned with religious myth-making, have portrayed the transcendent ulitmate Mind in terms of abstract principles with no physical form, as exemplified in Brahman, Tao, Dharma, Logos, and Spinoza's Pantheistic “substance”.

Therefore, purged of anthro-morphic hero-worship, the essence of all god-concepts has been simply the power of pure formal mathematical Logic, epitomized as the organizing enforming force that causes all things to be what they are. In other words, the creative cause of the same orderly, systematic, comprehensible reality that is studied by scientists. Since most Atheists have no quarrel with Math & Logic, they shouldn’t object to the Deist’s designing deity1, who creates in a manner similar to ordinary human imagination and reasoning, but without the physical and functional limitations of human bodies & emotions.

Even so, they may wonder why an ideal divine designer, working from scratch, would make an imperfect world with ongoing conflicts between good & evil, vestigial organs, and eyeballs with light receptors behind a veil of veins. The only logical answer to that conundrum is that imperfections are inherent in a space-time fragment of Enfernity2, and that defects are to be expected in the incomplete on-going creative process of evolution. Only in such a transcendent changeless state-of-being could you presume to find absolute perfection and categorical Holiness; to find G*D. And you can’t expect that perfect BEING3 to act like an imperfect human designer, who makes mistakes from ignorance. Instead, you’d expect any “defects” to be intentional and necessary to the ultimate goal of the system. Hence, that teleological purpose would be known only to the Great Intender.

How can a timeless, changeless impersonal principle create a space-time evolving universe? Well, the answer to that condundrum lies beyond the reach of human minds. So, just as the Multiverse hypothesis requires a leap of faith into the unknowable and unproveable, the G*D thesis is philosophy, not science. Any Atheist, who can believe in Superposition, Brane theory, String theory, and Parallel universes, should be able to accept the notion of a transcendent creator of, not just ours, but all possible worlds. It’s simply an intellectual acquiesence to the most probable explanation for existence, and which requires no fawning flattering ego-boosting worship.

End of Post 13

Taking The Measure of God :

Physicists now believe that our universe had a beginning. This is a very strong argument for God. They describe the beginning as a BIG BANG. All of them concur that for this to happen there must be a precipitator. In others words an entity would have had to cause it. I don't know about you but to my mind and that of some exceptually intelligent people that entity is God. . . .

But while these developments have generated a burst of discussion around the topic of spirituality, it would be a mistake to misinterpret them as religious events. The God at the heart of this debate is not the personal God found in organized religions. Rather, this God represents the laws of nature and is no stranger to the world of science. . . .

In recognizing the limitations of the human mind to understand something as transcendent as a God-like force, modern science concedes that such force is actually a much more likely explanation for our beginnings than our minds would have us believe. And in doing so, echoes the sentiments of metaphysical inquiry across the ages.


_____Lucy Engel, Quora quote

https://www.quora.com/Has-anyone-tried-to-scientifically-measure-God/answer/Lucy-Engel-1?share=9b899407&srid=umKAX

Consciousness : Awareness, sentience, the ability to experience, to know the world beyond the body. Also the power of creative imagination.

Brahman :
Ultimate reality, underlying all phenomena.
“Brahma more resembles Spinoza's idea of god, impersonal and detached, but with every characteristic imaginable and unimaginable.”

Logos :
eternal principle of order & knowledge, reason, logic, mathematical ratios, etc.

Mathematics :Metaphorically, the ideal logic and structure of reality

Holiness :
literally, wholeness; categorical, unconditional completeness; absolute perfection

1. Deist Deity :
This is not a god in the religious sense, but in a philosophical sense. Not a savior from an imperfect world, but the creator of an evolving cosmos. The contrasts & contradictions of good versus evil are inherent in the dual structure of a space-time, matter-energy universe. The deity may be perfect, but the opus dei could only reach the Omega Point of perfection by becoming god.

2. Enfernity :
a contraction of Eternity and Infinity; the opposite of space-time.

3. BEING :
the source & cause of existence, the creator of everything that is.

The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you ___Neil DeGrasse Tyson “The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible.” “That it is comprehensible Is a miracle.” ____Albert Einstein

Comprehensible :
Some say that the human mind is how the universe observes itself. That a brain the size of a soup bowl can grasp the immensity of the universe is, as Albert said, miraculous. Which may be why we feel obliged to make sense of cosmic order by applying our natural power of Reason to the signs of imposed order in nature. Imposed from without, from the setting of initial conditions.