Random Thoughts

Do I believe in God? That question is loaded with assumptions about both belief and God. Do I take as fact the doctrines concerning reality written by people in past civilisations? – No. However, there shouldn’t be a one-dimensional graded scale for belief that merely gauges the percentage probability of religious dogma being correct. The metaphysical understanding that most resonates with me is that there is a soul of the universe, in which we are all a part. There is no insistence on certainty here; this is a non-falsifiable interpretation of experience driven by internal feeling, not logical deduction – and in no way does it affect any commitment to a rigorous investigation of the world using the scientific method. So where do I feature on the belief scale?

God is hope. A hope that the universe is ultimately love; that all the suffering will be overcome; that life will be saved from despair; and that despite everything, it will all be okay.

For any existence after death to be desirable, it would have to be outside of time and space, and completely beyond our current comprehension of reality – as even a limitless abundance of joy would become meaningless within the causes and effects of endless time.

What if people start to prefer artificial companions over humans? Silicone imitations are already starting to become realistic; and the AI personalities could be tailored to individual requirements. Is reproduction going to be outsourced, like in Huxley’s Brave New World?

Random Thoughts

There have been plenty of middle management monsters running countries in history - they are psychotic narcissists who copy from a playbook given to them and repeat the past.

Can creativity thrive under authoritarian conditions, aided by artificial intelligence? Can slaves be compelled and threatened to create? Can they create if they are constantly lied to and manipulated, rather than inspired? The correlation to date has been with freedom.

If consciousness can be programmed to live in a heavenly state of bliss, why bother creating simulations? If reality can be anything, then why this one?

People who put percentage probabilities on the origins and nature of existence have a myopic view of the probability tree.

Exploring was great, but I am now about to focus. I probably won’t be updating my word count here, for a while.

Random Thoughts

On a hot day, humans can outrun horses over long distances.

Thoughts determine your wellbeing. Fluffy thoughts are lovely; however if they are based on some personal deceit, they will turn sour. Negative thoughts destroy you and everything you experience. Positive thoughts based on what is true is the optimal state of being.

I enjoy sentences where different interpretations are all true. The sentence is the fact, but the meaning is multiple. The ultimate sentence is when, on some higher level, all the seemingly contradictory explanations harmonise as one great beauty.

Does the universe exist if your consciousness is not perceiving it? This question will usually be met with “of course”, eye rolls and the like, instantly dismissing logic which suggests: the only irreducible certainty is that an experience is being perceived in the current moment. I am not solipsistic by inclination; it’s just interesting to me how quickly the idea is dismissed as obviously false and egocentric. But people are often irritated when an axiom is touched, and advances in knowledge are usually counter-intuitive. So what if all assumptions are false?

Gamer: We’re living in a simulation. I have proof.

Religioner: That’s ok. God created the world that made the simulation and put the Holy ghost in the machine.

God: By the way, something created me.

Causality

Science fiction presents some baffling themes around causality; for example, the future is the past because events are synchronous in all places at the same time. The current everyday understanding of causality is equally bizarre, however, since a causal chain of events cannot lead back forever, without having a prime initiating point that is outside these rules.

Metaphysics

The dictionary definition of “atheist”, as a non-believer in God or Gods, isn’t accurate because there seems to be many people who think that the doctrinal teachings of religious institutions are cultural-based anachronisms – and so would be labelled “atheist” for not adhering to definitive religious beliefs about deities – yet believe in some higher spiritual power they cannot define.

There are several belief jumps in this sentence: The universe is a purposeless collection of matter that mindlessly configured itself by chance out of nothing, existing in time with causes and effects that had no beginning. A reasonable-minded adherent might be aware of the glaring uncertainties, but state it is more parsimonious to adopt a materialistic concept of reality than implant a God belief system as an unnecessary layer on top. Yet the certainty with which many proponents preach this position as absolute truth suggests a type of commitment witnessed in religious belief.

An agnostic would state that the ultimate “why” questions are unanswerable, so from a practical perspective we should just be concerned with the “how” questions. The materialist’s objections to agnosticism – based on the burden of proof for God being on the proponent – misses the point to an agnostic who has already ruled-out religious explanations of God, but not higher spiritual meaning and purpose to reality. A particularly zealous materialist might overplay the remit of verifiable facts by stating that opinions about ultimate meaning are irrelevant if they are not scientifically falsifiable – ignoring the fact that their own conceptual model for reality contains unfalsifiable conjecture.

My own instinctive opinion is that I believe religions share the same spiritual root, although the core message was often corrupted by the doctrines and institutions that arose. This is my personal version of “spiritual but not particularly religious”. As I am most familiar with Christianity I can be labelled Christian; however I do adopt a filter and select only what resonates with me, mindful that the scriptures were written and edited by early practitioners of the religion; and that the biblical canon was decided upon by the politics of powerful men in ecumenical councils, rather than being the unadulterated teachings of Christ. Looking back in history, the cruelties that have been perpetrated by professed followers of the religion represent the antithesis of the message of Christ; for real spirituality – the root of Christianity – is always inspired by love, joy, and peace.

Vantage Points

I believe that to thrive at being a good human is the purpose, and tend to subscribe to something along the lines that: form ends on death, but time is just a perspective from one vantage point because the past, present and future are really one; all things are a part of each other, connected strands in the great tapestry of life; and maybe there are other dimensions of reality and incalculable vantage points.

Something instead of nothing

1:  Why is there something instead of nothing?

3:  Given an infinite amount of opportunities anything can emerge from the chaos, including our world. 

1:  But why are there infinite somethings compelled with energy, rather than nothing?

3: There was no beginning, our universe probably burst forth from another universe and so on. It has always been so.

1:  But where did the first universe come from?

3: Not everything has an answer yet, but no doubt it will be explained with the advance of scientific knowledge. Even if the goal is not reached, there is no need to include supernatural causes in the equation. Logic requires that we deal with verifiable facts, adopting the most efficient explanation.

1: Time does not make sense. The existence of things does not make sense. Can we not postulate the existence of something beyond time and space that created everything? Can we call this God?

3: There is no need to do so. We may not know what the variable x is yet, but we should not start invoking imaginary entities.

1:  Something doesn’t feel right.

3:  There is no evidence for the existence of a God or Gods, the world is explicable in terms of scientific explanation.

1: The fact is that I have always believed in God, it’s not a considered opinion or the product of upbringing, it’s just what has been instinctive to me.

3:  Ok well a cognitive scientist may explain this as a natural propensity to religiosity, there by natural selection to give a purpose for the survival of the organism. 

1:  Is there any meaning?

3: A person may look at the nature of the universe, see the randomness of outcomes, the cruelty and enormous suffering and decide there is no benevolence at work here. They may look at evolution by natural selection and decide there is no plan here. The universe, although magnificent, does not care about us - we must make our own way and make our own meaning in the brief window of opportunity for existence.

1:  Suddenly you’re speaking with feeling, maybe your outlook is motivated through sympathy and outrage at the sufferings in the world.

3: It is logic replacing delusion. Myths and fairy stories aren’t needed anymore.

1: I admire your beliefs more than belief systems motivated out of fear or desire for self-reward. I don’t care what you believe, as long as your actions are kind.

3: My conclusions are not beliefs. Religious delusions have been the cause of so much of the worst in humanity.

1:  Religions are subject to corruption, yet the spiritual path can be found in the different traditions.

3:  A God is not necessary to be spiritual, to behave with morality and to appreciate beauty in Nature.

1: You do have a belief system. You believe the universe ultimately has no purpose and its existence can be completely explained by rules contained within itself - when in fact there is no way of knowing the ultimate causes of things. You believe the answer to the mystery of existence is that there isn’t one.

3: I am offering the most logical approach to understand the world.

1: I don’t believe that the world would exist without a purpose. I believe in the possibility of a reality beyond this reality, beyond cause and effect, time and space. In this life I see the purpose as feeling connected with the world, being present and alive, feeling love, creativity, beauty and joy. The true reality of experience may run far deeper than what our senses show us.

3:  I deal with facts and what can be observed, not imagined.

1: Reality is tenuous – it can be anything depending on what our senses show us. Whether what they are showing is objectively real is unknowable. I think you have too much faith in the material surface reality of things, a reality that in itself does not seem complete.