I thought I’d try that out as a conversation starter.
Here’s more two-bits.
Seems to me humans are so desperate for answers, that we skip right over simply observing, absorbing, allowing connections to happen as your awareness and appreciation increases.
Allow the simple honest knowable facts to drive one’s faith.
Our cosmos, the universe that made our Solar System Possible that made Earth possible. Where an incredible amount of folds within folds of constructive harmonic complexity lined up just right, for life to evolve into complex creatures, which eventually evolved into all we see around us, and ourselves. {if you want to be poetic, Humanity, the most exquisite example of god's need and desire to understand herself. Appreciate it as poetry echoing reality}
Consider: Physical Reality ~ Human Mindscape
There is no body-mind problem, it’s a ego~god problem that people are afflicted with.
The idea of a deity is a human creation. There is no god except in the minds of humans. So whatever humans define as god, that is god to them, but it isn’t real or at least it isn’t actually a god. For example, nature is real and labeling it as god doesn’t make nature god. It’s just what a human labels it. That feeling churchgoers get, which they say is “the Holy Spirit (AKA Casper) moving”, is actually neuro-chemicals in their brain, which were stimulated by the external things (ie music, preaching, candles, etc) around them. It’s not actually a god, even though it is real.
Exactly. At one time we made gods of cats, volcanos, and other very real objects. This is called animism. Now, people call nature, the universe, or Casper the Holy Ghost “God”. Two are real, despite being misnomered, but Casper is a figment of their imagination.
‘‘ego ~ god problem’’ has dualistic nature.
According to Baruch Spinoza the substance of God
has dualistic nature.
There is transcendent God and there is immanent God.
The transcendent God is wholly independent of the material universe
(is beyond the grasp of the human mind) . . . and
immanent God that is contained within the world,
and thus within the limits of human’s understanding
A) Just because Spinoza said it, does that mean it’s true?
B) Reading those words, I suspect Spinoza also failed to appreciate the Human Mindscape ~ Physical Reality divide.
and thought he was discussing an actual something out there, rather than simply playing with an idea within his own mind.
C) “God” has been a great label for everyone to put their grandest ideas into, without ever really defining which god they are describing. I mean really, do these words explain anything?
and immanent God that is contained within the world
I have an unbidden mantra:
God is Creation, why rob God of God's Creation by slamming our origin story into a one-dimensional freeze frame.
Poetically it means a lot. In a "scientific" sense though I suspect it's as meaningless as those words by Spinoza, which are also more human poetry than sober science.
There is no body-mind problem, it’s a ego~god problem that people are afflicted with.
Not sure how I missed this party! I must have been binging on something else that week.
Anyway. I like the poetry of how we miss just observing. I have a drawing of a some ancient guy sitting on a post somewhere. Some tribe used to use that method for just looking at the stars. It should be used as restitution.
Anyway. There is no problem. We are only flawed in relation to what we perceive as perfection. What we perceive as perfection is what we evolved to perceive. We only ever approach a full understanding of reality. We may not ever even know when we reach the full perception and understanding. Our imperfectly evolved brains might not accept it and we might keep looking at those stars, wondering when they will act in a way that is different from what we know now.