Tag Archives: objective morality

World War Reality II – Hypnotic Illusion

big-brother-obamaBarack – Grand Magician

World War Real – Part I

And from Misinformation onto Illusion…

Think on this – Illusion

Ultimately, much of what we understand to be “information,” may, in fact, be misinformation.  Information creates our own personal illusions about reality.  These illusions may be personal or social.  And, naturally, personal understanding affects an individual’s social understanding. Much like the North versus South conflict previously discussed, the conflict itself acts as a misinformation indicator.  The most heated conflicts in human interaction have political and/or religious roots.

First, let’s explore events of mass illusion.  The year was 1979, and Joe Newman presented free energy to the world with his latest “energy machine” design.  Scientists scoffed while he quickly gained popularity and reached stardom.  Despite all of the sophisticated reason scientists threw at it, people cheered Newman on.  People simply wanted to believe – and, well, they did.  Joe represented a symbol of hope.  He came from a humble background, and was a high school dropout.  Newman was the people’s hero during his moment in the spotlight – a scientific revolutionary!

With the country inspired by the free energy fire, Joseph Newman spoke of godly visions and waved Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity around.  Newman claimed that God appointed him as “steward for his gift,”  and explained that energy is sustainable at the speed of light.  Through using Einstein’s equation and visions, Newman appealed to disassociated authorities.  This obscured any authority’s identity through the devices of a largely scientifically uneducated society, and an unknowable god.  In effect, Newman created and continued to fuel this mass illusion of hype, hope, and an American dream.

Unfortunately, hope cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.  Law one, or Conservation, overturned any probable notion of the perpetual motion device ever creating energy.  Law two, or Entropy, shut Newman’s case down completely – As, it states that when energy is expended, there will always be a loss.  Joe always boasted of what miracles the machine could never do, nor, would he ever be able to demonstrate.  The scientific community sharply debunked Newman’s claims with what is now taught in an introductory Physics course.

Street magicians such as David Blaine and Criss Angel would later rush in once again to steal our hearts, leaving us filled with mystery and awe believing that these gurus somehow gained insight into the metaphysical realm(s).  Angel walked on water, floated from building to building, while Blaine could throw a poker card at a moving bus window and make it appear on the other side.  Blaine wrote his book “Mysterious Stranger,” only to cast more shadows over his act.  He revealed some simple “magic” tricks, but offered spiritual advice, as well – never fully uncloaking himself.  Angel landed a TV show.  Both magicians pulsed through the internet on Youtube videos.  Angel caught my eye when he walked on water.  People were swimming underneath his feet while he was crossing over a hotel pool to illustrate that there was no solid platform underneath him.

Acts like those of Blaine and Angel swept the nation because they preformed with no pre-rigged stage to assist them.  Some people were convinced that they were performing real magic because the no “smoke and mirrors” environment made their acts seem impossible.  However, their fame was short-lived, and simply exposed by critical thinkers.  Both magicians used similar methods in their performances.  They utilized the entire shroud of the internet to distract the audience.  They would perform basic tricks in front of real enthusiasts and tape their reactions.  Then, they would later return to the area and use machines, props, and other tools of their trade that would have been easily spotted by the gawking crowd, earlier.  For example, Blaine would stage a partner inside the bus to stick an identical poker card to the one he would throw at the bus on the inside of the window.  Chris angel used cranes to “levitate” from building to building.  Angel also used clear, hollow (this explains people swimming under his feet), plastic boxes to walk across the water on.

Another interesting feat is “cold reading,” and the general science of hypnosis. Both, “cold reading” and mass hypnosis exploit subconscious suggestion.  In “cold reading,” a person claiming to be a “psychic” will say a basic, and very common name aloud – asking the crowd if anyone knows a “Bob” or “Michael,” or “Susan”…etc.  An even simpler tactic just uses a letter for the read.  Naturally, a member in the crowd will excitedly jump out of their seat and give up a name that it may be.  Then the “psychic” plays off of the information given, and may “cold read” for further information.  Mass hypnosis is can be simply powered in the same manner – by an idea.

Weapons alone, do not kill people, but beliefs doHitler commanded and army with an idea. Saturated with Hitler’s propaganda, the German Third Reich society became convinced that the Jewish people killed their Lord and savior. Ready and willing, the army took up the sword of vengeance and moved on their perceived enemy. Aldolf Hitler’s tactics are sickening, but he was not the first war commander to use this method.  Not by any measure.  Information is the very fulcrum, upon which social leverage functions.  Information is the axis upon which the social world spins.  Information becomes an idea when believed in, and a force of nature when fueled by emotion.  In Hitler’s case, the emotion of love and other honorable and ethical notions were channeled into a system of ideas grounded in a pre-existing framework of the nation.  Hitler simply stoked the embers Martin Luther left behind – igniting a white hot fire, religious in nature. Did Hitler invent this form of social control? Not by any means. The ancient Mayans were convinced that the gods would not let the sun shine until a sufficient amount of human blood was offered.  The ancient Egyptians are said to have believed that their rulers were gods, themselves.  This belief fueled war and slavery alike. In his book, “The Art of War,” war master and descendant from a rich bloodline of war advisors, Sun Tzu (500 BCE), named religious faith as the “first constant.” in successful warfare:

The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger.

History is rich with other examples, as well.  In conclusion – massive cultural alignment, or paradigm, is catalyzed by a very religious type of faith. In ancient tribal traditions, the spiritual advisor, or, Shaman of the tribe, was/is placed beside the King, or tribal leader.  In terms of cultural alignment, the Shaman’s advice wields the highest appeal to authority – even placed beyond the influence of the tribe’s Alpha male.  Also, another mysterious example of illusion is the Tibetan Tulpa Effect (must read – very interesting) .  All these examples denote instances, if not constants, of mass illusion – from Hitler to the tribal Shaman.

However, mass hypnosis is not so complex in models illustrating its effects on smaller group dynamics. A religious faith emotionally charges ideas, but is not the only game on the block.  Social dynamics allow for a variety of “controls.”  Peer pressure, non-religious ethically charged forms of leadership (aka – political ideologies), societal values, social deviance, in group/out group dynamism, sub-cultural facets, and other pockets of social/group motives may all be culprits of mass illusions. Yet, inducing hypnosis is as simple as planting an idea through a sleight of hand delivery – or, tapping another’s subconscious.

Current U.S. president, Barack Obama, not only monopolized on the minority vote simply by being a minority himself, but flawlessly executed other key tactics of mass hypnotism by sparking positive associations with his campaigns.  Obama demonstrated textbook propaganda techniques in wording “hope,” “change,” and his platinum hit “Yes we can!” in his speeches.  These simple techniques touched on deeper levels within the democratic identity of American policy.  Obama hit the very mark to ignite cultural alignment – And, with both tact and precision.  His win was a easy prediction to call from my perspective. Now, if only we could bet on it, haha. I could make quick and lofty financial gains every four years.  But, with all his hope preaching, the national economy still plummeted as projected, and he finished where his predecessor, George W. Bush left off.  Since then, we’ve seen criminal corporate bailouts, the passing of more laws, the unnecessary expansion of government, and…I’ll just stop there.  I do have a larger point here.

There are several options to choose from when a U.S. voter registers, but since the presidency in America was established, two primary groups have been the only players in the presidential circuit.  In the beginning, there were Federalists and Anti-Federalists.  The two groups changed their game uniforms up, and are now the Republican versus Democrat false dichotomy.  It’s amazing what linguistics can achieve.  Unfortunately, this is where class division begins.  And, by class-division, I mean social inequality.

To restate the thesis of this writing series – Misinformation instills a mass illusion creating social inequality, and thus establishes ranks of enslavement.  

Social Inequality will be thoroughly discussed in the next piece of this series.  Stay tuned! Sources will be cited eventually!

1 Comment

Filed under anthropology, blog, Blogging, cultural relativism, culture, Game, God, love, non fiction, Perception, Philosophy, Politics, psychology, Religion, Science, skepticism, Social Evolution, sociology, Subconscious, thinking, war

The Relative Variable III: Exploring the Nature of Knowledge

Fore note – This blog is part of a working series:

Relative Variable I

Relative Variable II

The feedback on this modal has pointed at the necessity of explaining it in simple terms and values. So, here it goes:

Relative Variable Dynamic

1) The IHK section represents the core of all human knowledge. That is, all knowledge first extends from the individual. The IHK field is ultimately representative of subjectivity.

2) The knowledge is then passed on to cumulative human knowledge, or, CHK, when it is agreed upon with another individual. Eventually, if accepted by a society, and furthermore, accepted Trans-culturally, the case in point may be revered as a universally consistent truth. CHK represents objectivity. This is why I would personally like to see objectivity understood as a cumulative subjectivity.

3) Estimated human knowledge (EHK) extends beyond basic comprehension and verifiable measures. Yet, EHK has value in principle. A fine example of EHK is the concept of infinity. It is not easily dismissed, nor is it easily conceived. However, it can be used in philosophical and mathematical fields as a logical underpinning. This particular knowledge field has no need for variable set points because it exists on the fringe of the realism dynamic. That is, it is reaching outward – toward the unknown.

4) Absolute Reality (AR) Represents the unknown, and, by extension – Realism. Every thinking mind on the planet can agree on the fact that there are things we don’t know, or possibly, ever know.

Relativity Dynamic:

I. The Relative Variable – This (refer to arrows on the right side of the model for clarification), in my opinion, is the most important function in this dynamic. The variable set points enable the boundaries of human knowledge to flex as the respective fields of understanding evolve due to either new information, change of belief, and/or perspective(s).

II. The Relative Absolute – In this dynamic, RA is marked by the oval/circular lines. These boundaries are subject to change. Absolute in the moment, but may restructure as respective fields of understanding evolve due to either new information, change of belief, and/or perspective(s).

Matrix01_01

…and then…Knowledge was power.

Feedback is appreciated!  Thanks!

Leave a comment

Filed under anthropology, Blogging, cultural relativism, culture, evolution, Human Condition, non fiction, Perception, Philosophy, Puzzle, relativity, Religion, Religion and Modern Politics, Science, skepticism, Social Evolution, sociology, thinking

The Cumulative Subjective

Don't be one!

Can beauty be objective?  (This can be applied to ethics, as well)

First, it’s important to note possibility versus probability.  Logically, anything unquantifiable is possible, but this does not denote its probability.  Said variable can only be established as probable through examination and testing.

If the question were to interchange “can” with the word “is,” then probability would be the potentiality in question. Whereas, the use of “can” is a general inquiry.  Thus, the answer to this question is – yes.

This concludes lesson one in this discussion.

Secondly, “objectivity” is often mistaken for an absolutist ideal. In contrast, it is based on a cumulative subjectivity.  This compromises the objective sentiment, entirely. Scientific study is centered on confirmed observation(s). Any proposed system of how discoveries synthesize is subject to change.  Acting as an “objective” observer simply implies that one acts without bias to the best of his/her ability.

Across history, there are a plethora of accounts where observations were incorrect, but were entered into widespread objectivity.  My two favorite accounts of this are the “Flat Earth” and “Geocentric Theory” incidents.  A good question for any critical thinker to ask at this point would be – “How do I know that the Earth is not flat, nor does it exist in a geocentric system.” In all reality, unless you’ve traveled to a point in the cosmos where you can see a round earth for yourself, or accurately verified the relationship of the planets with the sun – you cannot. At this point, you must appeal to authority for any ‘objective’ statement.

Problem? It may be difficult to see, so I will spell it out for you. In appealing to authority, one acts with bias. At this point a bias concerning said authority is developed, and sentimental judgment is employed. This tends to be problematic, as, bias is in direct violation of objectivity.

This concludes lesson two.

Lesson Three – Conclusion: In light of lesson two, we are to conclude that “objectivity” is ultimately a cumulative “subjectivity.”  This is still correctly held over personal subjectivity as meeting any prerequisites of attaining certainty, yet should not be mistaken for having attained it.  This would present the conflict of bias, as well. This is the veritable stumbling block that holds scientific endeavor away from progress. Highly achieved scientific professionals understand this. Any ‘fact’ must consistently slave to the whip of scrutiny in order to follow the general direction the ideal of objectivity travels in.

This concludes lesson three.

Lesson Four: As for reaching an objective notion of Beauty? Like ethics, beauty is contingent upon intrinsic identity. However, as with ethics, it can be agreed upon within societies and perpetuated by cultural paradigms. And, yes, as with ethical sentiments, it shows universal consistencies.  Some aspects of nature can be objectively verified as far as objectivity is enabled to encompass. The best example, according to my understanding, personal observation, and the authorities I am forced to appeal to – is sexual attraction. This type of beauty recognition is universal with the exemption of homosexuality minority and a few cases of unmoved abstinence (and, I won‘t mention other anomalies, lol). Inherent constants emerge as stimulus provoked by symmetry, health/genetic evaluation (which, symmetry recognition also serves),  hormonal agendas, and pheromones…to name a few. There are environmental, general arts, and, yes – even mathematical arguments for beauty recognition, as well.  Another factor to address is cultural and societal bias. Can you identify it in yourself?

Lesson four: Concluded

There is much, much, more information and philosophical arguments (including a few interesting current discoveries) on the topic, as well.  However – I didn’t promise a book! Google is your friend! Haha…

Leave a comment

Filed under anthropology, Archetype, blog, Blogging, Brain, cultural relativism, culture, humanism, love

The Measure of All Things

Socrates is one of the most common and celebrated names in philosophy circles, and his material is often covered in any philosophy 101 course.  What made his ideas so special?

The height of Socratic wisdom is something many may argue was not wisdom at all – devoid of philosophical value.  Despite all of Socrates’ reason and original thinking, his contention that the only certainty he could obtain is that he could not be certain of anything challenged the value of his philosophy.  How is this useful thinking?  Some may contest that the idea finds no application in our world today.  They may suggest that this apparent lack of knowledge is no wisdom at all.

The Greek roots of the word “philosophy” summarize it in its entirety.   The Greek translation is “love of wisdom.”  This leads us to explore the wisdom itself.  Wisdom might be summarized as the optimization of knowledge itself.  If Socrates was so wise, so aware, then why resort to such humility?

Life should be a very humbling journey.  Just as wisdom, it is not a destination.  Socrates dedicated his life to the vigorous pursuit of obtaining a deeper realization in relation to the world around him and his self.  He developed many ideas and synthesized bytes of information into industrious tunes of understanding.  Yet, he remained humble in his findings.  Certainty, or, truth, is the holy grail of the philosopher.  I would compare absolute certainty to knowing the mind and form of what we commonly refer to as “god.”

This humbling conclusion is the very reason people continue to seek answers, knowledge, and truth today.  Everything is not known, and this fact compromises everything that can be known.  Philosophers that arrived on the scene after Socrates demise have been expanding on Socratic wisdom by drawing up schematics for human understanding.  Immanuel Kant, pioneered metaphysics by attempting to define what he termed “noumenal” reality.   Though Kant’s hopes were misguided, they still caused him to drive out new and fascinating conceptual identities that continue to broaden the contemplation of the modern thinker.

Noumena” defines phenomena in the sense that it is the root of perception as it exists, and is extended from, within the individual.  Kant went so far as to argue that noumena creates phenomena.  In this sense, the observer (or, subject) would be the measure of all things.  You may ask yourself at this point – if reality is purely subjective, would it be important to think about it?  I would argue, yes in all cases.  I  would also argue that Socrates and Kant make a powerful duo when they are both considered right.  Subjectively, we are the measure of all things, but wisdom lights the path upon realizing the limits of our measure.

9 Comments

Filed under Philosophy, Religion and Modern Politics

Thinking for Yourself in a Social World

Most people feel that they are ultimately in control of what they believe, why they choose to believe it, and that their beliefs are individually unique.  Unfortunately, research suggests otherwise.  Everyone is a conformist at some level.  The human being is a social animal, and adaptation has shown to play key roles in survival of the human species and all other species as well.

Another area many people feel comfortable with is in maintaining a generally liberal bias.  The average person will not easily admit that they are judgmental toward others.  Yet, this is a survival skill that all animals employ naturally.  An environment must be cataloged accordingly in order that a species may survive it.  When discussing evolution, it is commonly misunderstood that the theory postulates that the fittest are favored to live on – avoiding extinction.

Ninety-nine percent of all species that have ever existed have become extinct.  This places survivors roughly in the one percentile.  The big and bad have fallen among this ninety-nine percent.  It is better stated that adaptability sustains a living being.  During the time when large carnivorous predators scoured the earth’s surface for sustenance, every living being was targeted.   Evidently, it was not the strongest that survived.  Rather, the small mammals that were able to burrow underground eventually would lead to us – the homo-sapien.  These small animals adapted, thus, leaving a very important lesson about the processes of evolution behind.  As it turns out – sharp elongated teeth, powerful muscles, and sheer size does not guarantee passage through the shifting sands of time.

Adaptability requires a comprehensive understanding of the surrounding ecosystem(s) and the dynamics of cohabitation in that environment.  Humans expend little worry about wildlife today.  Instead, their focus is centered on survival within their own species.  Upon meeting a stranger, a multitude of judgments pass through our decision making processes in order to determine how (or if) the new subject is to fit our social hierarchy schematic.  Some of these evaluations are conscious, others are not.  This is known as the primacy effect.  No one actually gets a second chance to make a genuine first impression.  In contrast, incorporating the idea of susceptibility to change into how we think of others is a wise choice.  Otherwise, we can be easily deceived.

Modern civilization finds itself in a historical seat that has become the very fulcrum for the balance of survival – not only of its own species, but the rest of the inhabitants of the earth, as well.  It has monopolized adaptation to the point of selfish lethargy.  This is also known as apathy.  The dark irony lurking in these very human shadows is the idea that caring for each other and our environment may prove to be the height of our adaptation.

In light of this looming threat of social conformity, truly unique thought may seem impossible.  That is due to the fact that society is the product of a progression.  There are no completely independent thoughts – but there will always be room for progress.  And…it is progression that defines the future.  Think…interdependently – think progressively – this is the key to survival in such a strange and cumbersome world.

19 Comments

Filed under anthropology, cultural relativism, culture, humanism, Philosophy, Politics, Religion, Religion and Modern Politics, thinking

Beliefs Are Dangerous

A proficient philosopher (anyone who understands relative connotations in a story) understands that models, metaphors, and other forms of illustration are necessary for expressing certain concepts. Personally, I find it meaningful to extrapolate from history for both guidance and illustration while demonstrating real world application. History is my greatest teacher. From its clutch, I can uncover rich parables and lessons from those who‘ve treaded earthly crust before me. It’s simple enough to point to Nazi Germany or Mao’s China, but tribal civilization is the oldest well to draw from. The events leading to the social collapse of the Easter Islands is a decent starting point.

The Easter Islands were once abundant with tropical life. Plants, animals, trees… It was paradise according to modern ecologists, geologists, and historians. Today, the island is barren much like a desert, though restoration attempts are underway. Remains of carven stone will continue to serve as a lesson to the human species. The island was originally colonized around 1200 BCE. The new inhabitants were likely Polynesian – a superstitious culture. However, as with most cultures, their beliefs varied as time passed. Since 300 – 400 BCE settlers had come, all carrying with them different perspectives on reality, gods, natural forces, among other cultural themes. The dominant cultures believed that the dead supported the living with luck, health, and overall survival. With a bit of positive reinforcement in those areas – one could even strive for a happy and full life. Thus, this supernatural facilitation was valued highly. When things went well, praise was given. When hard times came, some cursed the gods and spirits.

The idea of a god allows for a venue of belief and/or knowledge that provides reason for what seems otherwise unpredictable and frightening. Some gods give purpose in the believer’s mind. Tribal peoples have traditionally placed great emphasis on finding a reason behind natural phenomena. Why? A deity can explain away raging seas, wind gusts, rain, sun, temperature, etc. In effect, forces that once evaded primitive comprehension were made tangible – and thus, available for control to some degree. Once in awhile a coincidence would coin someone a medicine man, or, “Shaman,” in tribal rank. For example, a ritual performed by the individual may coincide with a natural event. Such a phenomenon is enough to nudge along the idea that the practicioner is in touch with conjured unseen forces. Those believed to maintain a connection with the unknown were/are often sought for their counsel. Through Shamanic understanding, believers could glean off of the promise of obtaining metaphysical knowledge. Leaders sought/seek counsel from the Shaman, as well. At times, Shamans were/are even elected to lead. Throughout history, there are not many cultures that have closed Shamans out of their councils. The Shamanic seat of authority can be shown to greatly affect physical reality, and not through magic. Rather, the role of the Shaman is a political one. In this model – Easter Island Shamans suggested erecting monuments symbolizing the deified dead.

This cultural landscape launched the decline of resources available based on the belief that raising stone idols appeased these godly ancestors. The expense was high, and would prove to be the island’s demise. Carving the stone required hard labor. The statues were erected with log built structures. The logging eventually led to deforestation. People were enslaved to carry out the tasks. The second element involved in this extinction event was an increase in population. Depopulation later became justified by a new cultural movement called the Bird man Cult. The cult contended that the direct line to the dead was no longer sufficient through the monuments alone, but must be attained through physical combat. Emerging victors were thought to have won the favor of the gods. Reminance of petroglyphs laden with bird man features tell pieces of their story. The creator deity, “Makemake,” was thought to play a key role in combat proven leadership rituals.

Europeans would eventually arrive and erect a monument to their god of choice (also known as a church). Peruvian raids raked the region repeatedly shortly after to capture slaves to be either sold or sacrificed to gods in their culture. Many island inhabitants vanished. Due to a devastating lack of resources, cannibalism plagued the region as well. The statue production left the land torn and the tree roots that once bound the tall trees to the ecosystem no longer served their vital purpose. Soon, soil erosion devastated the remaining vegetation and the land could not support a significant population. After the environmental decline, under 50 people were reported to be remaining inhabitants. The island serves as a microcosm for the final conclusion within a much larger schema. This allegory is merely one tale in history where ignorance was placed higher than achieving crucial knowledge. This same plague eroded other ancient civilizations despite their demonstration of possessing a much deeper understanding of the workings of the universe and their respective ecosystems.

Ancient ruins of the Mayan people, some archaeologists estimate to be roughly 10,000 years old, echo both tales of civilized success and civilized destruction. Mayan peoples sought to appease their gods of belief as well, by holding rituals for many occaisions – some performed to harness the power of the sun. Despite the idea sounding like lunacy today, this was a reasonably logical aim. Modern civilizations today understand that the sun is a necessary resource. If modern technology could wield its power, it would be a valuable commodity – bought and sold on the stock market. Mayan natives of old were an industrious civilization focused on agriculture, technology, architecture, art, cosmology – among other crafts. For its time, Mesoamerica housed a highly advanced empire. The culture was among the first to develop a complete language. Through observation, they formed a highly accurate calendar that is the centerpiece for archaeological marvel today. With an intricate understanding of mathematics, they built temples that also capture modern scientific awe.

Mayan interest in cosmology seeded the culture with a rich scientific background. Day and night, the Mayan peoples watched the sky move in order to record natural events and effects. Their keen observations spawned a practical system for understanding the world in which they lived. Mayans consistently held pantheist views that bridged human existence with nature, animals, and the universe. Yet, they also maintained a diverse allegoric mythology. Gods were assigned to disease, lightning, thunder, rain…among other elements and animals. Often, “Maize” is seen as the primary cultural deity of the time – A female commonly personified through important resources such as Jade, Maize, or Cacau. Ritualistic practices, including human sacrifice, were incidentally packaged in their ideas concerning the workings of the universe as well. Ritual that reflects the depths of cruelty and inhumanity.

Human sacrifice was conducted by Mayan culture to sanctify events. Most religions host a deity, or system of deities that require sacrifice of some kind. This is a common theme found in superstitious thinking. Rituals can call for fasting, bowing, and/or some form of sacred practice that displays worship, humility, obedience, and/or an act of sanctity. Captured rulers and warriors were highly honored in this tradition. The sacrificed were thrown to the masses to be eaten. The not too distant Aztec culture held similar beliefs. According to record, the Aztecs sacrificed 20,000 people in a single ceremony once. The lifeless corpses were then eaten by the crowd below.

This all may sound a bit shocking and well beyond current trends concerning moral rationale. I assure you that this streak of humanity’s capacity for bloodshed is not buried in the distant past as you would prefer to believe. A particular practice prevails in current civilizations and is visible throughout human record. This plague spans the globe. I am addressing the practice of war. Simply because this act runs beneath a different title, does not exempt it from the discussion. In principle, war parallels the travesty of human sacrifice. The difference between war and religious sacrifice is the driving ideology behind them. Generals send soldiers to their deaths just as ancient rulers once forced heads upon mantles.

In conclusion, what ties this brief exploration of human history together is belief itself. The Polynesians exploited their local resources to the extent that the ecosystem became unsustainable. The Ancient Mayan and Aztec cultures cruelly captured human beings and sacrificed them. The entire world has practiced human sacrifice through war since men came into being. There are countless examples, ranging from the petty to the magnificent, that can show the motivation of belief behind such moral deviance. Aside from auto mechanical bodily function, everything humans do requires a quality of hope, belief, knowing or ideological motive.

9 Comments

Filed under Religion and Modern Politics

Calling God

Jesus is often a theist preference when the older part of the bible is questioned. A model citizen of upright character worked as a humble carpenter. He taught peace, love, and moral values. He overcame the temptation of Satan. A feat even his father could not achieve.

Practically flawless, Jesus is revered worldwide today. Jesus, was, above all – an exemplary human being beckoned from the relics of human history. However, people are also taught that he is a god. He walked on water, made festive drink, and commanded the sky to rain fish. Oh, and his resurrection seals the claim. There were many witnesses – none of whom can testify today. Equally, the authors of the text cannot be questioned.

And, of course, the text commands that it is not to be questioned. Interesting reading. If you were to question any alteration of the text, the text will also inform you that this god commanded that it not be changed. How convenient.

Ironically, the god of the bible lifted weights far beyond his capability. He changed the properties of water, violated the laws of thermodynamics, and a Christian favorite – made something come from nothing. Actually, he made a lot come from nothing. Including himself.

This is the very logic that draws many people to belief in a god or gods. The idea that something cannot possibly come from nothing. However, this claim is purely of theist origin. There is not one scientific theory that proposes the something from nothing idea. However, this is common logic that Christians use to assert ‘nothing’ is core fiber of scientific theories. Coincidentally, this nothing is also the origin of Jesus’ second life, summoned fish, father, and the fracturing of his own universal structure. Yet, when theists are accused of hiring the same logic, we are told that our feeble intellects cannot grasp such miracles. The origin, mind, presence, morality, ways of God are held from tangible reach. It seems that this being has abandoned the universe. Yet, unbreakable scientific laws are broken to account for his existence. The god concept is the ultimate catch all.

Welcome to the conundrum where you must either choose to deny what can be known about the universe or deny what you cannot know about the universe. The latter option being the dismissal of a god. Or – a particular god, rather. Upon accepting the god concept, you are invited into a vortex to explain something incomprehensible with, well, the incomprehensible itself.

Conclusion – this option leads nowhere logical, yet appeals to logic. I honestly hear it every time I discuss my lack of belief in a personal god with a person that believes in him – despite its apparent and ominous contradiction. Since when did explaining something in terms that cannot be explained – or, defined, become a reasonable answer? In mathematics, variables are used for hypothetical circumstances. Until defined, they hold no value. God offers no answers. No value. The concept has always been intellectually bankrupt. It is simply an anthropomorphized placeholder for the faithful. A human like universe. A variable that is scientifically untenable. In contrast, scientific discovery does not contradict itself – making such a human invention like a god both dismissible and unnecessary. Scientific discovery is derived from observation – not feelings.

Perhaps, the intellectual Christian may suggest that their god is everything at work that is not yet understood, or defined rather, in scientific understanding to date. Coincidentally, this same unknown body of knowledge is the very pursuit of modern scientific thought. This undefined body of information is revered by atheists alike. Some scientists even call it “god.” Yet, no laws were broken, and consistency is prevalent.

It seems that the ever growing body of science is quickly consumed by the faithful as evidence for their squandering, yet only accepted because it is undeniable. As our knowledge grows, illuminating the dark places, gods are forced into the shadows – claimed as metaphysical, unseen, and unknowable. Just as if they had never existed at all. Yet, universal workings are beautiful whether they have a face or not. Philosopher, priest, atheist, and scientist alike, all gracefully bow in humility before the universe – for the light shines from the dark unknown.

Truth is an ongoing journey that the past has merely hinted of, our imaginations only glimpsed, and our sciences have gently touched.

In the words of Einstein:

The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive forms – this knowledge, this feeling is at the center of true religiousness.” (Albert Einstein,The Merging of Spirit and Science)

4 Comments

Filed under Religion and Modern Politics