It can be asked whether God created man in his image or whether man created the image of God in his own image. However, it may not even be that straightforward because it could involve evolution of consciousness itself. Kant spoke of the 'thing in itself' referring to the transcendent and Schopenhauer spoke of 'the thing in itself as being human consciousness. So, it may be that God as the eternal aspect is part of the evolution of everything, primarily outside of space and time, beyond the duality of mind and matter itself.Raymond wrote: ↑April 11th, 2022, 4:22 am In explaining the presence of the universe, you can assume the laws of the universe brought it into existence, which leaves the question: how can these laws, and the stuff they describe, have brought themselves into existence? Aren't they too stupid for that?
You can say in response that the laws and the stuff of the universe are eternal, but this leaves a gnawling. From where comes this eternal stuff with its laws?
The solution: intelligent gods. The are eternal and have the intelligence that the laws and stuff lack to bring themselves into eternal existence.
Should we go one step further again? Which means, asking what caused the gods? If they are eternal, why should we ask? We did this for an eternal universe, but we did that because the universe is not intelligent enough. Eternal intelligence need not be explained.
I read in an answer to a question somewhere:
"Whoever argues that a first cause is needed and that this first cause is god, has to answer the question: What is the cause of the creator god?"
Any thoughts are welcome.
Should believers in god(s), the creator(s), ask the question what created them?
- JackDaydream
- Posts: 3220
- Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm
Re: Should believers in god(s), the creator(s), ask the question what created them?
-
- Posts: 2181
- Joined: January 7th, 2015, 7:09 am
Re: Should believers in god(s), the creator(s), ask the question what created them?
To say intelligent somethings can somehow bring themselves into existence doesn't make sense to me. Why? What's the link between intelligence and self-creation, how could that work? And the intelligence didn't exist when it was supposed to create itself.Raymond wrote: ↑April 11th, 2022, 4:22 am In explaining the presence of the universe, you can assume the laws of the universe brought it into existence, which leaves the question: how can these laws, and the stuff they describe, have brought themselves into existence? Aren't they too stupid for that?
You can say in response that the laws and the stuff of the universe are eternal, but this leaves a gnawling. From where comes this eternal stuff with its laws?
The solution: intelligent gods. The are eternal and have the intelligence that the laws and stuff lack to bring themselves into eternal existence.
Should we go one step further again? Which means, asking what caused the gods? If they are eternal, why should we ask? We did this for an eternal universe, but we did that because the universe is not intelligent enough. Eternal intelligence need not be explained.
I read in an answer to a question somewhere:
"Whoever argues that a first cause is needed and that this first cause is god, has to answer the question: What is the cause of the creator god?"
Any thoughts are welcome.
I don't know how we go about answering questions like why is there something rather than nothing, except by following the science and hoping something plausible turns up.
And it might be that the answer isn't a match with the way we think about causality, physics and logic, which we derive from observing the universe and how it works when it's up and running, and from our flawed and limited perspective. QM suggests we've a lot more to learn which might require paridigmatic shifts in thinking, and we've no way of knowing how little we still know.
We can speculate, but it's right to say we don't know, when we don't know. Calling what we don't know ''god'' doesn't really add anything but baggage which then requires additional clarification/justification.
-
- Posts: 317
- Joined: January 23rd, 2022, 6:47 pm
Re: Should believers in god(s), the creator(s), ask the question what created them?
I didn't express myself well. The intelligent gods are eternal. Not created. But they created the universe and all life in it, by creating the basic stuff that evolves, particles and spacetime. They didn't create themselves but a copy of heaven and themselves in it. They had a reason to do that. The virus gods, bird gods, whale gods, homonid gods, dino gods, etc.Gertie wrote: ↑April 15th, 2022, 6:58 pmTo say intelligent somethings can somehow bring themselves into existence doesn't make sense to me. Why? What's the link between intelligence and self-creation, how could that work? And the intelligence didn't exist when it was supposed to create itself.Raymond wrote: ↑April 11th, 2022, 4:22 am In explaining the presence of the universe, you can assume the laws of the universe brought it into existence, which leaves the question: how can these laws, and the stuff they describe, have brought themselves into existence? Aren't they too stupid for that?
You can say in response that the laws and the stuff of the universe are eternal, but this leaves a gnawling. From where comes this eternal stuff with its laws?
The solution: intelligent gods. The are eternal and have the intelligence that the laws and stuff lack to bring themselves into eternal existence.
Should we go one step further again? Which means, asking what caused the gods? If they are eternal, why should we ask? We did this for an eternal universe, but we did that because the universe is not intelligent enough. Eternal intelligence need not be explained.
I read in an answer to a question somewhere:
"Whoever argues that a first cause is needed and that this first cause is god, has to answer the question: What is the cause of the creator god?"
Any thoughts are welcome.
I don't know how we go about answering questions like why is there something rather than nothing, except by following the science and hoping something plausible turns up.
And it might be that the answer isn't a match with the way we think about causality, physics and logic, which we derive from observing the universe and how it works when it's up and running, and from our flawed and limited perspective. QM suggests we've a lot more to learn which might require paridigmatic shifts in thinking, and we've no way of knowing how little we still know.
We can speculate, but it's right to say we don't know, when we don't know. Calling what we don't know ''god'' doesn't really add anything but baggage which then requires additional clarification/justification.
-
- Posts: 2181
- Joined: January 7th, 2015, 7:09 am
Re: Should believers in god(s), the creator(s), ask the question what created them?
OK. So the claim is the eternal,uncreated aspects of the universe (all that exists) are intelligent. So then the question is what does the property of intelligence have to do with the property of being eternal? And how could we flawed and limited beings whose understanding derives from a perspective located in speciific and contingent time and space go about answering that question?Raymond wrote: ↑April 15th, 2022, 10:29 pmI didn't express myself well. The intelligent gods are eternal. Not created. But they created the universe and all life in it, by creating the basic stuff that evolves, particles and spacetime. They didn't create themselves but a copy of heaven and themselves in it. They had a reason to do that. The virus gods, bird gods, whale gods, homonid gods, dino gods, etc.Gertie wrote: ↑April 15th, 2022, 6:58 pmTo say intelligent somethings can somehow bring themselves into existence doesn't make sense to me. Why? What's the link between intelligence and self-creation, how could that work? And the intelligence didn't exist when it was supposed to create itself.Raymond wrote: ↑April 11th, 2022, 4:22 am In explaining the presence of the universe, you can assume the laws of the universe brought it into existence, which leaves the question: how can these laws, and the stuff they describe, have brought themselves into existence? Aren't they too stupid for that?
You can say in response that the laws and the stuff of the universe are eternal, but this leaves a gnawling. From where comes this eternal stuff with its laws?
The solution: intelligent gods. The are eternal and have the intelligence that the laws and stuff lack to bring themselves into eternal existence.
Should we go one step further again? Which means, asking what caused the gods? If they are eternal, why should we ask? We did this for an eternal universe, but we did that because the universe is not intelligent enough. Eternal intelligence need not be explained.
I read in an answer to a question somewhere:
"Whoever argues that a first cause is needed and that this first cause is god, has to answer the question: What is the cause of the creator god?"
Any thoughts are welcome.
I don't know how we go about answering questions like why is there something rather than nothing, except by following the science and hoping something plausible turns up.
And it might be that the answer isn't a match with the way we think about causality, physics and logic, which we derive from observing the universe and how it works when it's up and running, and from our flawed and limited perspective. QM suggests we've a lot more to learn which might require paridigmatic shifts in thinking, and we've no way of knowing how little we still know.
We can speculate, but it's right to say we don't know, when we don't know. Calling what we don't know ''god'' doesn't really add anything but baggage which then requires additional clarification/justification.
-
- Posts: 317
- Joined: January 23rd, 2022, 6:47 pm
Re: Should believers in god(s), the creator(s), ask the question what created them?
Not the uncreated aspects of the universe but the eternal heaven with the eternal gods in it. They created the universe.Gertie wrote: ↑April 17th, 2022, 12:50 pmOK. So the claim is the eternal,uncreated aspects of the universe (all that exists) are intelligent. So then the question is what does the property of intelligence have to do with the property of being eternal? And how could we flawed and limited beings whose understanding derives from a perspective located in speciific and contingent time and space go about answering that question?Raymond wrote: ↑April 15th, 2022, 10:29 pmI didn't express myself well. The intelligent gods are eternal. Not created. But they created the universe and all life in it, by creating the basic stuff that evolves, particles and spacetime. They didn't create themselves but a copy of heaven and themselves in it. They had a reason to do that. The virus gods, bird gods, whale gods, homonid gods, dino gods, etc.Gertie wrote: ↑April 15th, 2022, 6:58 pmTo say intelligent somethings can somehow bring themselves into existence doesn't make sense to me. Why? What's the link between intelligence and self-creation, how could that work? And the intelligence didn't exist when it was supposed to create itself.Raymond wrote: ↑April 11th, 2022, 4:22 am In explaining the presence of the universe, you can assume the laws of the universe brought it into existence, which leaves the question: how can these laws, and the stuff they describe, have brought themselves into existence? Aren't they too stupid for that?
You can say in response that the laws and the stuff of the universe are eternal, but this leaves a gnawling. From where comes this eternal stuff with its laws?
The solution: intelligent gods. The are eternal and have the intelligence that the laws and stuff lack to bring themselves into eternal existence.
Should we go one step further again? Which means, asking what caused the gods? If they are eternal, why should we ask? We did this for an eternal universe, but we did that because the universe is not intelligent enough. Eternal intelligence need not be explained.
I read in an answer to a question somewhere:
"Whoever argues that a first cause is needed and that this first cause is god, has to answer the question: What is the cause of the creator god?"
Any thoughts are welcome.
I don't know how we go about answering questions like why is there something rather than nothing, except by following the science and hoping something plausible turns up.
And it might be that the answer isn't a match with the way we think about causality, physics and logic, which we derive from observing the universe and how it works when it's up and running, and from our flawed and limited perspective. QM suggests we've a lot more to learn which might require paridigmatic shifts in thinking, and we've no way of knowing how little we still know.
We can speculate, but it's right to say we don't know, when we don't know. Calling what we don't know ''god'' doesn't really add anything but baggage which then requires additional clarification/justification.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023