This is what I think god is. I am not religious. Agnostics and believers, how can this be dismisse

I have to introduce this thread by explicitly dismissing the social and cultural aspects of organized religion. I don't care to debate those issues here. It is what it is, educate yourself and come to a rational or personally satisfying conclusion (I hope that that conclusion does not lead you to hatred or violence). My point is that those cultural tools of organized religion; motivating people to do things, imposing a system of law, imposing a system of morals, a system of values, and a system of priorities based on faith or what the agnostic consider fantasy, is not what I am going to talk about.

I think that religion can be inspiring, and it feels good sometimes, and faith can be satisfying and good for people in a real way, but for many people with active minds who participate in a civilization so widely accepting of the scientific worldview, at some point the stories and concepts that make up the religious worldview have to map on to something that we can believe is real; something tangible, rational, that can have a place in a scientific worldview that is not founded on the suspentioin of the rational lense which we use to make sense of everything else.

That is where the problem lies: there does not seem to be a coherent mapping of spiritual concepts onto those concepts and experiences that make up real life, at least no map yet exists that can (for a certain population) stand up to a strict, rational, scientific and reasonably critical analysis. Many people spend much of their life dealing with and developing the internal conflict of wanting to believe and apparently having the ability and inclination to believe, while also developing a rigorous rational scientific worldview. The map of the one onto the other is important and a real challenge that I suspect many readers are intimately familiar with, especially around here. I think that I have such a map, and it may be of interest to you.

This is what I think god is.

You know yourself to be a cognitive entity: an entity capable of cognition. This cognition is made of things like perceptions, memories, language, concepts, and imagination. I wonder what the criteria is for a cognitive entity.

There is a thought experiment of cognitive science and philosophy of mind devised by a philosopher named Lawrence Davies, and developed by a cognitive scientist named Ned Block. The experiment is called the China Brain. A summary:

The thought experiment

Suppose that the whole nation of China was reordered to simulate the workings of a single brain (that is, to act as a mind according to functionalism). Each Chinese person acts as (say) a neuron, and communicates by special two-way radio in the corresponding way to the other people. The current mental state of China Brain is displayed on satellites that may be seen from anywhere in China. China Brain would then be connected via radio to a body, one that provides the sensory inputs and behavioral outputs of China Brain.

Thus China Brain possesses all the elements of a functional description of mind: sensory inputs, behavioral outputs, and internal mental states causally connected to other mental states. If the nation of China can be made to act in this way, then, according to functionalism, this system would have a mind.

The simple idea to take away from this experiment is this: The function of the brain can be correctly characterized as many individual nodes communicating in a complex way, connected in a complex network. This is a functional description of the brain; the thing that gives you a mind and makes you a cognitive entity. A simple China brain could be devised which has the same functional characteristics as a human brain: a large number of nodes connected in a complex way and which communicate in the right sort of way. Certainly, in principal this could be set up, there are no fundamental reasons other than the logistical difficulty that should prevent it.

The question is, is the China brain a cognitive entity? My answer is, why shouldn't it be? It has all of the same functional characteristics of a human brain, just at a different scale.

My conclusion, then, is that if the China brain is indeed a cognitive entity, then there are likely many similar arrangements already in place. For example the actual China; it is a large group of individuals who communicate in a complex way and who are connectd in a complex network. It is an observed fact that these kinds of arrangements of people in geographical areas gives rise to nations and cultures which act like they have a mind; they have interests, memories, concepts, a language, and they seem to be able to develope in a cognitive sense in a way which does not seem fundamentally unbrainlike. These things resemble cognitive entities both in underlying functional construction as well as in behavior(not to say that the behavior is human like, but a dog's behavior is not human like, and it is a cognitive entity by virtue of its brain).

If cultures and nations are cognitive entities, then it is likely that other systems are. For example ant colonies, that communicate chemically and in which each individual acts for the good of the colony. Ecosystem are a group of interconnected entities, which are connected in a complex network and which interact in complex ways. According to this model, the ecosystem+human system would be a cognitive entity, as would the human+internet system, as would the oceans and their contents, as would the biosphere of the earth; the entire earth satisfies the conditions for a cognitive entity if the China brain does, and I can't see why it shouldn't.

How far can we take? If the earth is a cognitive entity, is the solar system? The galaxy? The universe?

I think that this is a way of understanding god. I think that he lies on this spectrum of cognitive entities; perhaps at the top. I think that this concept of god is largely consistent with a number of important spiritual concepts: We are a part of him and he us, we are all bound by his will, he is and is in control of everything, when we die we are as much a part of him as ever, his will is indistinguishable the progression of reality second by second. I think he is a real thing, and that this model is a good way to conceptualize him.

I think that this concept is useful. It is to me at least. I look foward to your input, and your challenges to this idea. To those of you who will say, "Why are you so desperate to believe, you made all this up to satisfy an irration conflict within yourself." I say, "What part of it is wrong? It as much a scientific theory as any other. Do you reject it because anything that incorporates god is taboo to you? Again, what part is untrue? If you reject the China brain, how do you do so without appealing to a soul or something like it?" And to those of you who will say, "The china brain is invalid because human beings have souls and that's why we are cognitive entities." I say, "Snap out of it man. The soul does not map onto anything real other than that warm and fuzzy feeling you get sometimes, which can be best explained in terms of neurology."

There is an interesting theory that is taken seriously within neuroscience that is thoroughly compatable with the theory above: Global Workspace Theory. Check that out if you have a minute.

If this is interesting or abhorrent to you, please discuss it with me.

[edit on 8/4/10 by OnceReturned]

A human brain react to something that happen. The China Brain doesnt react to anything, they work/interact by themself from the start aka busy mind.

The brain improve overtime with new input. CB on the other hand doesnt need any new input, a good example is (cough) North Korean Brain. Almost 100% isolated from the rest of the world and yet they still can build ermm buildings, same goes to Bushmen Brain, still manage to be alive.

Another problem is, how do you explain an ancient civ the wiped from the earth before they even manage to communicate with other civ, and yet still manage to finish uhh few mega pyramid project?

Another proof of not cognitive entity is civil war. A war happen only if there are 2 different side with different ideas. Does your brain have civil war within itself ? CB might and can have civil war.

If earth is cognitive entity, then we sure a helluva of a neuron, able to learn by itself.

A better comparison for your discussion would be jellyfish/starfish, where each nerve react by its own and yet still function as whole.

I do think that God is the totality of "All that is" and I do believe that each "thing" within that totality is a fragment of God, serving as "cells" in God being as a loose analogy.

I dont have any problem with that at all. My personal "awakening" experience was just that, losing my personal "cellular" identity, and experiencing from that "totality" perspective for a period of time, before returning to my individual self again.

Of course I have to also hold the possibility that it could have been some misfiring of my own neurons in mind, from an objective viewpoint. Though I lean towards it not being that, personally and subjectively.

So God is dull, aggressive, stupid, wasteful, cruel or at least unintentionally brutal, and so slow in His thinking that one of His thoughts takes over ten times his age in years to get from one side of His brain to the other.

Sounds just about right to me.

reply to post by OnceReturned


Good thread!!

But when we are looking at the brain, are we merely looking at the conscious processes that go on in there when comparing it to a country like China??

"Consciousness is a much smaller part of our mental life than we are conscious of, because we cannot be conscious of what we are not conscious of. How simple is that to say; how difficult to appreciate! It's like asking a flashlight in a dark room to search around for something that does not have any light shinning upon it. The flashlight, since there is light in whatever direction it turns, would have to conclude that there is light everywhere. And so consciousness can seem to prevade all mentality when actually it is not."

(Can't remember who i am quoting here. )

We are overestimating the conscious process and are ignoring the subconscious process. Did you know the conscious mind has a process capacity of about 60 bits per second while the subconscious mind clocks in at about 11,2 million bits per second.

Who in China will be taking up these tasks?? There aren't enough people in China (or this entire universe for that matter) to take up this task....

Peace







[edit on 5-8-2010 by operation mindcrime]

I think it's time here to say 'Use Your Brains And Common Sense'. There is no GOD. Never has been. It's just a control method used by the romans and carried on by the Vatican. Look at some of the Roman history. Pliny The Younger wrote alot of the stories in the bible as well as other roman emperors. It's all just a big BS story to make people slaves. A big con.

And it has worked. The Greatest SCAM in the world.

Get it? There is nothing there!!!!

reply to post by Astyanax


I dont get where you are coming from with that. Why does an article proposing that the universe is expanding mean that "God" is dull, aggressive, stupid, brutal, etc?

It reminded me of a picture i saw a while ago that compares the neural net of the brain with a picture of the universe.. It gives some credence to the whole idea, imo.

Look for yourself.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Why does an article proposing that the universe is expanding mean that "God" is dull, aggressive, stupid, brutal, etc?

No, no, none of that stuff, just the slowness of His thoughts.

Look at the post below yours; somebody is comparing neurons in a mouse's brain to the structure of the universe and concluding the latter is a brain because it 'looks the same' as the neurons. Well, if the universe is the brain of the 'cognitive entity' OnceReturned proposes and calls God, then it's a brain 168 billion light-years across. Unless thoughts travel faster than light, which I beg leave to doubt, a thought couldn't cross God's brain--the universe--in less than 168 billion years. I know they say the mills of God grind slow, but that is ridiculous.

As for 'dull, aggressive, stupid, wasteful, cruel or at least unintentionally brutal,' well, these are easily inferred from direct observation.

Not much happens in the universe, given how big it is; over vast tracts of it, nothing is happening at all. Dull as ditchwater, the universe. Not even a decent naked-eye supernova* these four hundred years or more.

For 'aggressive, stupid, wasteful,' etc., please see 'biological life'.

*In my humble opinon, SN1987A was too dim to qualify as 'decent'.

*

reply to post by RainCloud

The China Brain doesnt react to anything.

Not even joint US-Korean exercises in the Sea of Japan?

CB on the other hand doesnt need any new input, a good example is (cough) North Korean Brain. Almost 100% isolated from the rest of the world...

So... joint US-Korean exercises in the Sea of Japan--not an input?

Another problem is, how do you explain an ancient civ the wiped from the earth before they even manage to communicate with other civ, and yet still manage to finish uhh few mega pyramid project?

The Egyptians built the pyramids. The Egyptians were in contact with other civilizations. Such as the Hebrews, whom they enslaved, and Hittites, who destroyed their civilization.

Does your brain have civil war within itself ? CB might and can have civil war.

I have two words for you: Eros and Thanatos.

Most brains are continually at war with themselves.

If earth is cognitive entity, then we sure a helluva of a neuron, able to learn by itself.

100 billion neurons in my brain alone. 6.7 billion people on Earth. Not even counting the animals, that's one helluva lot of neurons.

A better comparison for your discussion would be jellyfish/starfish, where each nerve react by its own and yet still function as whole.

I agree. The OP has out-Spinozaed Spinoza.

*

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

I do think that God is the totality of "All that is" and I do believe that each "thing" within that totality is a fragment of God, serving as "cells" in God being as a loose analogy.

Fine, so long as one doesn't expect this God to actually do anything. Why not go even further, and attribute holographic properties to Him? Then you can have all of God in every cell/atom/monad what have you. See the OP's Spinoza and raise him a Liebniz.

My personal "awakening" experience was just that, losing my personal "cellular" identity, and experiencing from that "totality" perspective for a period of time, before returning to my individual self again.

They all are. This is the essence of the mystical experience.

Of course I have to also hold the possibility that it could have been some misfiring of my own neurons in mind.

Why 'misfiring'? If nature can come up with something like an orgasm, I wouldn't put anything past her.

*

reply to post by operation mindcrime

(Can't remember who i am quoting here.

)

Julian Jaynes, The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. A very dodgy source, although I am in complete agreement with the passage here quoted.

Originally posted by Astyanax

*

reply to post by operation mindcrime

 

(Can't remember who i am quoting here.

)

Julian Jaynes, The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. A very dodgy source, although I am in complete agreement with the passage here quoted.

Thank you for that. I just remembered the quote, never read the works of Julian Jaynes.

On the subject of thought and it's "speed"...

Unless thoughts travel faster than light, which I beg leave to doubt, a thought couldn't cross God's brain--the universe--in less than 168 billion years.

Wasn't there some theory about our mind being precognitive when it comes to certain impulses?

Maybe I should consider doing some actual studying and research instead of grasping at straws here..

Peace

Who is God!

A good place to start is by saying: We cant have something that does not already exist within the infinite. We cant make anything of something that does not exist. Right?

The infinite is a constant. It is as big as it can get, and it is as small as it can get. That makes the infinite a single infinite body of everything.

When something is a constant it doesn't have a reason to change. Unless it wants to.

We humans have intelligence, but if the infinite wasn't already intelligent we would never be either. Because if the infinite wasn't intelligent, where would we get intelligence from?

Where would our chemical combination come from if it didn't already exist in some infinite form?

reply to post by spy66


You, sir, make sense.

Plus you are hurting my brain...

Can we then state that we are God??

Peace

Originally posted by operation mindcrime
reply to post by spy66

 

You, sir, make sense.

Plus you are hurting my brain...

Can we then state that we are God??

Peace

We can't state that we are God. Because only one body can be infinite. But we can say that we are a finite image of God. We represent a finite image of God until we die. That would mean just a fraction of Gods intelligence if even that


[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

The OP was talking about the China brain. I have thought about that for a long time. Because since we are a part of God we should be able to tap in to Gods intelligence, or the infinite somehow!

But mathematically there is no way we can tap in from a physical finite being.

We cant measure the distance from finite to the infinite. Put mathematically it would be: What is the distance from year 2010 to 0?

But God can tap into us because God can measure the distance from 0 to 2010.

Can any of you prove that there is no God? If you can, than I'll stop believing. I promise.

Originally posted by prophecywatcher
Can any of you prove that there is no God? If you can, than I'll stop believing.

I promise.

It is probably easier to prove Gods existence than it is to prove that God does not exist.

The infinite must exist for existence to exist. That should be proof enough.

This is such a cool subject!!

Please allow me to pick everything you said apart purely for entertainment value. Clearly you have thought this over a lot and you clearly know what you are talking about.

I am merely trying to understand your perspective and the only way to do this is by challenging your believes.

Originally posted by spy66
We cant have something that does not already exist within the infinite.

Because within the infinite everything already exists, right?

We cant make anything of something that does not exist. Right?

Because within the infinite everything already exists...

It is as big as it can get

Everything.

and it is as small as it can get.

Nothing.

That makes the infinite a single infinite body of everything.

Big leap!! Everything and nothing are one, I can go with that.

When something is a constant it doesn't have a reason to change. Unless it wants to.

Like my wife.

We humans have intelligence, but if the infinite wasn't already intelligent we would never be either. Because if the infinite wasn't intelligent, where would we get intelligence from?

That's where you loose me...here we are assuming that infinite is intelligent because it holds, within itself, the potential for intelligence. Just as much as it holds the potential for absolute non-intelligence (you know what I'm trying to say). We humans clearly have chosen, in this density (?? can I call it that??), to apply intelligence where infinite still is both.

We can't state that we are God. Because only one body can be infinite.

By your definition wouldn't infinite be God and non-God ( this is getting ridiculous ) at the same time?? While somebody/something within this potential still has the option to choose to be God??

I am struggling with that part....

Peace

reply to post by operation mindcrime


I think i can answer all your questions. But to get you to understand what i am trying to say is harder

I will start from the beginning. And i will use some images to give you a vision of what i am trying to say.


- The question everyone is asking them selves is how could nothingness create existence? "Nothingness represents the infinite dimension"




Under i will display a image of the infinite nothingness.



This image represents "God". The first dimension. This dimension is as big as it can get and as small as it can get.
If something is infinite it must be both small and large at the same time. Infinite can't be just one: Small or Large. Only a finite can be either small or large. But never infinite.



Lets put some measurements to the image to give it depth.



Now, its easier to see that God is both infinitely large and infinitely small at the same time. And you can see that there is no finite in the image yet.

All finite must exist within the infinite dimension. But the big question is: how did God create the finite? Where did God get them from?

Well there is only one explanation for how God could have created finite, which must exist within himself. And that is by a compression.

If you look at the image above again, you can see that God is infinite in all directions. That means there is no reason for God to change. Because God takes up all space possible. This is why God is a constant.
What you also should keep in mind is that everything that is need to create the existence we know, must exist within the dimension of God. Because that is the only place we can exist.

Why is the infinite black dimension intelligent?

Because it has no reason to change. It is all that it can be.

But since we do exist. The infinite must have wanted it, if not we would not have existed.




This is how God created a finite existence:

1. By a compression.

Here is a image of what it might have looked like, if we were able to observed it.





The arrows on the red lines represent the direction of compression.

This is how God/the infinite created a finite existence. Here God is creating the heavens and the earth. But also every finite that exist, planets and the whole charade.


The compression of energy would also create the light. And it would probably have looked something like this, if we were there to observe it.




This light would be a product of emitted energy from the finite existence being created.

The light is also expanding outwards, meaning it is expanding back to what it used to be "infinite".

The expansion of this light also gives us some more information. It tells us that the finite is emitting other energies as well. This emitted energy creates a differential between the infinite and the solid finite. Reducing the compression over time, and Cooling down the solids.

Now, if you read Genesis Chapter 1. You will see that this all fits the story.

I have now given you a platform to understand how this all works. But i can still help you out if you have questions

EDIT as everything starts to cool down. The light will disappear and the finite creation will start to appear. Like this:



Or like this:




























[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Originally posted by Astyanax
joint US-Korean exercises in the Sea of Japan?

Yes that is an input, but please look in larger timeframe. They developed for few thousand of years without ever knowing there is a blonde/blue eyed man. Does a neuron/brain develop intelligence alone by itself ?

The Egyptians built the pyramids. The Egyptians were in contact with other civilizations. Such as the Hebrews, whom they enslaved, and Hittites, who destroyed their civilization.

Again, look in the larger timeframe, Egypt-Hebrew is kinda local in earth size brain/cognitive entity. CB doesnt know South America exist or Egypt, yet they too have pyramid/tumulus. Comparing earth as brain, its like two part of brain knowing how to build wheel and yet they never knew each other.

I might be wrong, but I think the OP original intention is to say.
"We are part of a cognitive entity, we are part of god"

On the basis: We are still developing/learning by our own, which means the god is always in learning mode (we're part of it, remember?) forever (earth yet to find another neuron, and another and ...) .
I reject that proposition.

spy66 seems to propose a better concept that I can comprehend.

I think that you are god, and so am i. It is possible that if we remove all context from the meaning of the term god and just apply it to everything we have and see/experience, then we will have what we want to be our god.

We have to realize that everything is god from a different perspective based on experience infinitely creating itself into other probable experience in positive time.