Bigthink - Idea Comments Feed

Comment on: God is the name we create to make our ignorance more bearable

Bigthink — Thu, 08 May 2008 19:16:16 +0100

Pokoj posted: 'I don't consider myself a beast'

Typical Christian chauvinism. Ask your nearest doctor, surgeon, dentist, veterinarian: are we like animals inside? Do we have blood, hearts, lungs, guts? Do we shat like beasts? Do we reproduce like animals?

Do we share 99% DNA with our brother beasts? Do we not have 95% of the SAME DNA as a frog?

You think yourself special because you have a laptop and your dog does not? We are beasts. We are creatures. We are animals. Only when we lift our eyes up from the mud and dream of god do we become divine.

Thus our divinity is all-in-our-minds. I repeat:

I like the Coyote story because it suggests that our mother is both divine AND of this earth. Thus we can have our cake (belief that we are special) and eat it too (accept ourselves as mere beasts).

The story goes that Coyote is the god who walks this planet and lives among her people. She is our mother and created us from her own body. Mythology suggests that Coyote in turn was created by Old Creator from the genome of this planet. Old Creator was furious at Coyote for 'stealing' the knowledge of creation, for making an undesirable creation and attempted to destroy humankind with a monstrous flood. Coyote saved a few of us and Old Creator relented and left.

Some tell this story Biblically, that 'the sons of god found the daughters of men attractive and copulated with them' thus creating a hybrid or, as time went by, an aggressive new species. The original sin then is not of our making, but of the god-head which created us.

Comment on: God is the name we create to make our ignorance more bearable

Bigthink — Sat, 03 May 2008 14:54:25 +0100

Though I cannot define God, (see my response to hz's topic,) that doesn't take away from the idea that I believe in Him, that I feel something in my heart that affirms this belief, and that remains even when I stray from religion and spirituality for a point in time, and this is what causes me to return, shameful yet no less unbelieving, and even strengthened. I don't consider myself a beast, or fearful of life and death, and did not come to my belief in God through these means that you describe. I also do not consider Christianity irrelevant in our day and age. The archaic belief systems need to be reworked, yes, but in essence it is still very much relevant, if not more so...

Comment on: God is the name we create to make our ignorance more bearable

Bigthink — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:07:57 +0100

I was addressing your argument that a fear-of-death or 'awareness of mortality' is a necessary component to create a belief in god. And that possibly, only humans possess this.

I argued that the spreading of fear within a prey group of a new predator indicates a fear-of-death or 'awareness of mortality' response. You suggest that response is instead instinct but still wonder if animals contemplate.

I would like to remind you that we are not that special, that we are just beasts, even as these other beasts are that we share the planet with. Of course we like to see ourselves as above the beasts because we can contemplate MORTALITY GOD and the UNIVERSE, but what proof do we have that animals -as our brother beasts- also do not?

You expressed a typical argument that divides the beasts from humankind, but allowed a door to stay open just in case. So I pried that door wide open by demonstrating that your argument seemed to PROVE that animals have an 'awareness of mortality' or a fear-of-death. Thus the possibility that contemplation of god is not a unique human aberration, but a natural consequence of animal life, if one accepts your original argument as valid.

E.g.: fear = self awareness or awareness (of god).

I like the Coyote story because it suggests that our mother is both divine AND of this earth. Thus we can have our cake (belief that we are special) and eat it too (accept ourselves as mere beasts).

Comment on: God is the name we create to make our ignorance more bearable

Bigthink — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 04:32:59 +0100

Coyote,
I didn't assume all other animals were ignorant of this... and maybe they have their own 'God' constructs, but the instinct to survive will ensure that all animals are aware of threats when danger arises, is that awareness of mortality?... do these animals in moments of quiet contemplation decide that something outside themselves created the entire universe and that they are sinfully lesser beings as a consequence?... ad infinitum..

Comment on: God is the name we create to make our ignorance more bearable

Bigthink — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 04:05:38 +0100

musycks posted:
'Call the 'other' what you will.. but if we were ignorant of our own mortality, we would not have invented the ultimate comfort food... God.'

.........
You argue that only beasts who are aware of their mortality have a belief in god, assuming what?: that Beasts are unaware of their mortality or that humans are NOT-Beasts?

I would suggest to you that Beasts indeed are aware otherwise they would not develop fear of their predators. For example, a photographer working high on a remote Andes plateau films foxes and Llamas that express no fear of him. Does each animal have to experience pain at the predator's tooth and claw or see the predator kill kin to develop a fear of similar death? Or is there a vehicle (a culture, a meme) within the species which passes on this fear to the young?

The rapid spread of fear within a population of a new predicator indicates that individuals are indeed aware of their mortality. Thus if we follow your argument, then this fear and awareness of their mortality must indicate that animals have their own ideas of god.

Comment on: God is the name we create to make our ignorance more bearable

Bigthink — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 02:15:08 +0100

bard63:
A SCIENCE INFORMED FAITH SYSTEM.

I agree with you that faith has been with humanity for as long as we can discern our past, but where you try to dismiss this human trait as no longer relevant, I argue otherwise. Evidence that religious belief has always been with us is an indication that it is, like I posted, a part of the Human Code; that it was not only everywhere in our cultures, but embedded within our programming.

The oldest words that we have discovered and deciphered tell the same old story of a set of god-given rules, with the exception that the story of Gilgamesh sets forth the argument that humanity was civilized by Sex and Beer. That a prostitute worthy of the goddess could, with a little beer civilize the worst cretin.

Religions are memes: human cultural ideas that seek to survive evolve and spread even as do genes. And like genes, they seek evolutionary advantage and payout some reward, or they die.

And, more importantly, memes also can create evolutionary dead ends. So if you think this particular wide expression of our Human Logos is the obsolete, you need to prove it. But you will need to take into consideration that a replacement meme will probably be necessary.

I suggest something that takes into consideration our Understanding, rather than insults our Intelligence. A SCIENCE INFORMED FAITH SYSTEM.

The Sun is our father in heaven.
http://www.bigthink.com/faith-beliefs/9020

Comment on: God is the name we create to make our ignorance more bearable

Bigthink — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:18:12 +0100

Hey Coyote
I think that evolution has driven us to raise our eyes from the mud, as our brains have developed, and our understanding of the world around us has developed.
God as an explanation for the primitives was the best they could do, but these days, we know much better than to rely on (sofar)unproveable, and highly unlikely theories.

We can live magical, mystical lives , in awe of the beauty of all around us, without needing to name the reason for our appreciation. The buffalo and the zebra see the same world, and they love the sun and the beauty of the sky and grass - without the need for any constructs of fantasy.

Comment on: God is the name we create to make our ignorance more bearable

Bigthink — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 05:13:24 +0100

Hey Coyote... I'm with the Bard on this one.. a nice line.. but no 'to be or not to be'....
most religions want to shed light on the unknown... as the unknown becomes known, there's no room for religion to move, so it shifts to an even deeper metaphorical model.
A lot of Xtians for instance today, would be by the standards of only 100 years ago, run out of town... they can't accept the Virgin birth, the blessed assumption, trans-substanciation, as the literal things that their faith requires them to, even that JC was the son of God... so they retreat into allegory and metaphor until their God is as eastern and esoteric as the original Gnostics intended.. refer to the Cathar heresy.
Call the 'other' what you will.. but if we were ignorant of our own mortality, we would not have invented the ultimate comfort food... God.