Randomness of Godly stuff

Okay, tim-you said we should continue this on Emma's forum.
Well, here's the question-Did we humans create a God because we need to feel as if there is someone watching over us? And, if we reach a point that the universe's secrets are open to us, will we no longer need a God, as there is no need for someone to watch over us at that point?

I think that we created a God because we needed one- not only to watch over us, but to explain the world and give the world order. Many religions create a force of good and a force of evil (God and the devil) and thus describe the world as a battleground. A battleground is not necessarily a good thing to be living in the middle of, but it was a structure that people could understand.
We're already starting to wean ourselves of our gods. Polytheism is almost completely a thing of the past. We don't need a god of thunder anymore, because we know why thunder exists *promptly gets smote by Zeus, Thor, and Xolotl all at the same time*. In this way we get rid of the gods of physical things. The one remaining god, now, is a god of metaphysical/spiritual/emotional things. This one is harder to get rid of because the things that this god "explains" or guides us through are not easily explained by science. This is the god that people want to have because just the idea of a god watching over them give them spiritual confidence. I think that eventually, people may be able to form this confidence on their own and gradually let go of the god idea, but in the mean time the process of getting rid of this one remaining god is going to be different than the processes that the rest of them because the nature of that god is different.

EDIT: Somebody needs to tell Anna and Mark to get on this forum...

I think we use God to explain why there is something instead of nothing, and why it matters so much. The closest I've come to absolute faith is a moment of gratitude - I know I didn't ask to be born, etc., but the world is (on balance) so awesome and I get to participate and somebody or something must somehow be responsible because I'm not and I'm just grateful.

Emma-I was thinking of a similar scenario to the one we are in with the whole god thing. I think the closest I can come to is the relationship between a child and their parents. Eventually, we have to leave our parents, and go out and conquer the world alone. When I said this on Facebook, Anna replied that we would still have respect for our parents, even when we are no longer dependent of them. For instance, we could, at a point, regard a god as an equal, and not as a master to be obeyed. It would be remarkably selfish and conceited of us to consier oursleves that close to Godlinnes, but it could happen.

Also, if a God chose to show themselves, how would we react? For all of time, we humans have had a remarkably difficult time being oppressed and ruled. For instance, we could not stand for the British to rule over us, so we overthrew them. Of course, its remarkably hard to fight an omniscient, omnipotent being, who has millions of ways to kill you whilst you have none to protect yourself. But, it could, hypothetically, be done. For instance-the Empire was supposed to be undefeatable, yet a ragtag group of rebels managed to bring them down. Also, the Persian army was supposed to be unstoppable, with forces so large they drank the rivers dry, and shook the ground while they marched. And yet, 300 spartans managed to hold them off from taking Sparta. (Of course, all of the spartans died eventually, but thats not important.) So, what im trying to say is that it can be done.

I don't beleive it's possible not to be equals in the first place. If there is a god, then we are all equal to god by default, just because we exist. The world would not work otherwise. Rank was invented by humans and carried through into religion, but it is not real. Now, if what we call god is really a collection of consciousnesses, then yes, the whole/group is more powerful than the individual, but neither is less important for it. We don't move toward Godliness- we're either already there, or nobody is. The reason nobody can stand to be ruled is because we AREN'T- the whole idea goes against the natural order of things. It was just made up because, again, humans want order, and they aren't quite mature enough to realize that true order comes from a harmonious existence (which we may or me not be ready for). I think it probably originated from predators/prey/food chain etc, which creates sort of a "rank" sysyem in nature. This spread to groups of the same species, and ta-da! we have something that we call "civilization". We are getting beter though- in Erich's class we've been talking about how we are becoming nonpolar (as opposed to unipolar/multipolar/etc). If we can pull it off without falling into a state of anarchy and nuclear war, it will be a major step forward.

I disagree with you on the whole control thing-I mean, if you're ALPHA WOLF, you cant really say that. In lion prides there are dominant males, in a wolf pack there is the Alpha, so why cant there be one huge 'alpha' that controls the humans? Tim apparently read a book that said that maybe one of the reasons we humans created a God is because we are so good at recognizing patterns. For instance, the patterns of the migrational routes of the animals, or discerning tracks so we could hunt. So, we humans saw ourselves making tools out of raw materials, (stone, wood, bone, etc.,) so, to us, it made sense that there was a larger 'man' up there, making the entire universe out of raw materials.

And also, I think it is possible to ascend to Godliness. I mean, we humans no very little about our universe. One of my favorite qoutes is by Thomas Edison, which is, "Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge.." We might have harnessed tools with daunting destructive power, able to wipe out cities, but we haven't even touched the surface of what we cannot do. Maybe, in a lesser alien race's eyes, we are like gods, but to others, we may be jsut blundering children trying to find our way. We are still growing, however, so we can reach a point where we truly can call ourselves Gods.

Of course, it all depends on what you define as a God-if you mean an omnipotent, omniscient God, who is master of everything, invincible and immortal, then I dont think we can ever reach a point like that. However, it all depends on perspective. Another qoute by Thomas Edison, "If we did all the things we are really capable of doing, we would literally astound ourselves." We have some of the potential to do great things. We just haven't gotten to that point yet.

Alpha Wolf is allowed to make whatever argument she chooses, by virtue of being Alpha wolf. So ha.

I do thing the recognizing patterns thing is why we made God the way we did (in some cultures at least)- the Greeks even made the gods have a hierarchy themselves- but just because we can recognize a pattern and emulate it doesn't mean we should. We can also recognize and account for the pattern of becoming addicted to alcohol or gambling or drugs, but who wants to emulate that? Hierarchies work in nature because it's a survival policy. The whole point of being intelligent and having big brains is that we're supposed to be overcoming that. Making a God was one step- it proved we knew how to extrapolate. Now we have to get rid of that god and retire it for good or make a new one, created in the image of our goal and not the image of what we are or have been.

Once we ascend to the level of gods, then what will we call our 'gods'? Do gods have 'gods' that they want to reach the level of, and so on and so on, or is it finite?

I'm saying we're spiritually equivalent, not effectually. I'm spiritually equivalent to Hailey or Tess, but neither of them could type this message. I'm also spiritually equivalent to God, but I can't make a universe. Yet.

The whole idea of a hierarchy- in anything- is extremely primitive. Just look at history. The more primitive the civilization, the more it relied on hierarchies. There may appear to be exceptions to this rule, but I'm saying 'primitive' in an intellectual sense, not a physical sense. Look at the feudal system-- that was an extreme example of a hierarchy, and hmm... I wonder why they called it the dark ages...
Why? Because in a hierarchy only the opinions/thoughts/findings/statements of the people in power are allowed to prosper. And why is that? To preserve the hierarchy. The very act of building your society around a hierarchy cripples its ability to advance. That's why it HAS to be unnatural and counter to any true progress.

Okay, here's the key difference: You're saying we have some of the potential to get there. I'm saying we're already there because we exist, but we haven't matured enough to be able to do it yet.

Well, I'm sure Anna knows this.

So about you saying that morals have something to do with creating a God? You said, "Just because we can recognize and emulate a pattern doesn't mean we should." And as for our brains being able to do away with the hierarchy thing, Chimps ahve a hierarchy. So do Gorrillas. We only have a slightly larger brain capacity than the others. And what do you call Communism? What do you call our current Government? If that isn't a hierarchy, nothing is.

And how can we tell if we are the 'spritual equivalent' of a God? And how can we be at all equivalent to an omniescient, omnipotent being in our current position? But when we reach that point, (notice i said 'when', not 'if') there will be nowhere to go. How could you get any better than an embodiment of everything? AND DONT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ALPHA WOLF. When we reach Godliness, in our own sense, there will be no way to go up on the HIERARCHY. Which brings me to another thing-If you're saying that hierarchy is a primitive thing, why do we still have it, in the form of a God? And are you calling Alpha Wolf primitive? But you give me an intersting idea about the God's Gods. Potential book idea.....

You're basically saying the exactly same thing as I am. I say we have the potential to get there, you say we aren't 'mature' enough to do it. We're both saying that we already have it inside of us. We just have to learn how to bring it out. And I hope I am there to see it. It will be glorious indeed.....

And by the time we have reached Godliness, we will not need Gods at all. We will be masters of our own fate.

Beta Wolf doesn't need to concern her lowly self with these matters.

How could we get better than an embodiment of everything? Why, we could become a flute player, of course.

Yes, our government is a hierarchy. Pretty much every government we've ever tried has been a hierarchy in some way, which is why none of them are completely foolproof.
Okay, so maybe we aren't quite ready to do away with the hierarchy system yet. But we will need to eventually.

We're equivalent in the same way a dog and a human are equivalent- not mentally or physically, but in the fact that we exist as sentient beings who (have the capacity to be/are) omniscient and omnipotent.

And I expect to see "Dedicated to and Inspired by Alpha Wolf" on the inside cover of that book...

So do you think we reach godliness as individuals or as a species? Or as a planet (in that case we could be waiting a while, due to creatures like mealworms, archaebacteria, and Glenn Beck) ...

What is our fate if we have reached a state of Godliness? Is it a dead end?

Yes, Emma, you should not concern your lowly self with these matters.

I agree that our government system is not perfect. To make it perfect, we need to hunt down and exterminate those pesky, hindering beasts known as Republicans. But what do you suggest we do when a hierarchy is no longer apparent? Hierarchies are a part of everyday life.

The problem is, a dog does not have the same brain power as us humans, so it could take millions more years for them to evolve, instead for us, which it will only take 1000-10,000 years.(hopefully)

I MIGHT mention it in passing, on the back page of the book. That is, if you bow down and admit that the highest life form possible to acheive is an accomplished trumpet player.

I think we reach Godliness as a species, (including, much to our discomfort, Glenn Beck) but that revelation might be recognized by a single person or group, and they spread the knowledge to others.

When we reach Godliness, I think our duty would be to help other species reach that point across the universe, as 'keepers' of the universe. Hah! Another book idea, this time of MY OWN ideas. No dedication this time, "Alpha Wolf".

I must concern myself in these Alpha Wolfly matters-- otherwise Beta Wolf might try and take over.

Harmoniousness. Presumably, once we are mature enough to get rid of hierarchies, we won't feel the need for them anymore.

But is there any difference between the time a dog would take to become a human and the time a human would take to become a god?

Trumpets were minions devised by the demons of the underworld as servants for their all-powerful masters, the flutes. They were supposed to be trombones, but they drank too much coffee as children and now have incurably high voices and short statures. The next batch turned out better.

So if one person dies before the species has gained godliness, do they just wait around in the afterlife for the rest of their species to catch up? And how are you defining a species anyway? Does the universe have some foolproof form of taxonomy?

Keepers of the Zoo (er, Universe....) Fine, no dedication. But you have to say in your "About the Author" that you worship a mysterious higher being known to mortals only as 'Alpha Wolf'.

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin thinks we are evolving toward Jesus - that he is the source and the goal - when I think about some of the things he said it actually kind of seems o.k., and is a way to think about Christianity that seems more acceptable to me.

I think we're evolving toward more and more beautiful creative expressions of life. So it's not a focused evolution but a sort of spreading out ....

O.k., Micah, I'm looking for a novel called "The Keepers"!

Eh, I don't know. Maybe it's because I'm half Jewish () but I really don't think Jesus was any more special than Mohammad or Abraham or any other prophet. I think the prophets were just smart people who had ideologies that people could stand behind because they backed them up with religion. I can respect them for their ideologies, as people with good ideas about how to live, but I don't think they actually had any more of a connection with God than ordinary people do. They only said they were holy because that was the way to get people at that time to believe them and to stand behind their ideas (the sort of ideas which, now, would stand on their own, but still would not receive as much attention unless they were connected to a religion).

I thought the whole point of evolving was that it wasn't 'toward' anything (in a physical sense- we could have spiritual direction).

Well, Emma, are you going to lead a revolt against Anna?

With harmoniousness-how would we have any order? People would be completely free to do anything they pleased, without any hindrances. Our lives revolve around hierarchies-nature revolves around them.

Im not sure which would take longer. For a dog to evolve into a human, they need to enlarge their brain,and it would take even more time for them to evolve into us than it did for US to evolve into us. Mainly because the apes we evolved from already had the basic body shapeand structure, as opposed to dogs, who are rather different than us. Unless, of course, you're saying the time it takes for dogs to evolve to the INTELLECTUAL equivalent as us.

For a human, well, we supposedly only use like 2-5% of our real brain power. Thats one of the ideas for magic-Magicicans have learned to harness the ability to use all of their brain power. Maybe that's the same thing with godliness-the ability to access every iota of our formidable brain power.

And, with evolvoing to godliness, I dont think it entails that EVERY SINGLE human on the Earth has to reach that point. For instance-we consider our race to be capable of basic space travel. Yet, if you were to ask a random person off the street what goes into space travel, 999,999,999 times out of 1,000,000,000, they wouldn't be able to tell you.

I'll have to ask Anna's permission before adding her into the book.

I think, with evolution, we are actually evolving towards a physical goal. Survival of the fittest. We want to have some trait that sets us apart from others-that lets us survive through the challenges life throws at us. For us humans, we have our brains-thats really the only thing that is keeping us alive. We're slow, weak, small, and have no form of protection, other than the ability to manipulate our surroundings.

Why would I do that? That's like Kim Jong Il leading a revolt against a private in the North Korean Army.

What you're describing is anarchy WITHOUT harmony. Anarchy WITH harmony would function quite smoothly. It's just that people are still too dumb to do it properly.
Hierarchies revolve around our lives. Our lives do not revolve around hierarchies. If they do, it doesn't mean hierarchies are good; it just means our lives are dysfunctional and we need to fix them.

Yes, I was meaning the intellectual equivalent. Don't get me started on taxonomy.

If we could access every bit of our brain power, it would be awesome. We'd probably have about 12 or so senses... and telekinesis...

So if some humans achieve godliness, it's the same as the whole species achieving it? Or does it just mean the species as a whole is capable of it?

Beta wolf isn't important enough to be in a book! Maybe a folio.

Yes, but that came about via its usefulness. We didn't crawl out of the sea with the intention of evolving big brains.

Did you really post that last at 3:49 a.m.????

Why does evolution have to be some linear kind of progression with a "higher" and a "lower"? What if evolution looks different for every individual? Maybe there's an ultimate harmony - if we all get where we're supposed to it will all make a big harmonious sound .... the music of the spheres.

And isn't there something funny about alpha wolf arguing against hierarchies?

No! I still haven't figured out this whole time zone thing...

Yeah, that's probably true. It isn't linear. But aren't we at least moving toward smartness?

Yes, Micah already brought that up. I said Alpha Wolf can argue against whatever she wants and doesn't need to justify her actions to lowly mortals. (Yes, I can do that. Any gun dealer will tell you that war is wrong, but that doesn't stop them making a profit from it )

I know - Micah told me he said that - and I was disappointed I wasn't the clever one.

How would you define "smart"? IQ tests say language and logic abilities, some kinds of social skills, space-relation stuff, abstract thinking, "working memory," numbers skills ... I'd have to look - the effort is to define it as something that correlates with academic success. True? I think we'd also have to add at least "good" to "smart," and I want to find a way to add creative or imaginative ...

Isn't 'smart' the same as 'creative'? It means using your brain/intellect to replace what we lack in strength, teeth, claws, etc.

"Good"?

I think creative is only part of smart. Like one of the intersecting circles in a Venn diagram thing illustrating smart.

Good: I am not sure I'll agree with this tomorrow but at the moment I would define good as contributing, caring, investing concern into - like the ability to put interests not immediately of benefit to us ahead of those that are of benefit to us.

The way you're defining 'good', it's just empathy combined with the ability to extrapolate/reason/plan ahead/etc. Which I suppose could be an aspect of intelligence.
But I think the difference between good and intelligent in a survival sense is like Gryffindor vs. Slytherin. The vast majority of Slytherins are probably much more intelligent than Gryffindors (bravery is sometimes seen as just another kind of stupidity, after all, and 'Slytherin smarts' do seem to have the most survival value.) The difference, as far as I see it, is 'good': However, if it's something that has a detrimental effect on our physical health (even though it has a positive effect on our spiritual health) I'm pretty sure we wouldn't evolve toward it on purpose.

I think good is defined as morally and ethically sound in our own minds. I mean, Hitler was evil in our minds, but do you think that he thought himself to be evil? No. He thought he was doing the right thing is his twisted mind. Otherwise, he wouldn't have committed any of the atrocities he did. Mostly, in the moment we do what we do, we think it is the right thing. Later, reflecting on it, we might slap ourselves, telling ourselves we were stupid. So, in a way, Good, by definition, is all in the mind. Now, there is a somewhat universal term to define good, which is widely accepted by society and the general population. But still, there are many differences between our perceptions of good.

I agree with the motherly unit. Creativity is only a part of good. You could be creative in the ways you are good, though.

So I'm reading this book that suggests we consider the possibility that the world/universe has a subjective aspect to it - is a "whole" with a purpose - and that we can relate to it as some kind of feedback loop of its own subjectivity. In other words there are individuals, and they are to some extent independent, but also to some extent a feedback loop of the subjectivity of the whole (which is the universe). (I know I just repeated myself - I'm in a hurry ...). The new physics allows some give in the system and that "give" might even allow the whole to communicate with us via changes in the flight patterns of birds, light, etc. The author is really smart and I'm probably not doing her justice, but I love the idea. What do you guys think?

So, are you basically saying that every individual has their own small aspect of individuality and self-purpose but we're all working towards a common goal.