Posts Tagged ‘god’

My Rebuttal to a Metaphysicist

July 6, 2012

“To not believe in the Spiritual realm of our existence means nothing I say will matter to ya”

I disagree. I can listen to your arguments all day despite being a materialist. I think you fear that nothing you can say will be able to change my mind because that might mean that you don’t really have something revolutionary to say. You might use the same arguments others have used already and that have been shot down and let’s face it, so far religion  vs science is 0 –  100, the scientific method is the champion. We know now that we know. We know that we are things that know things, including the thing that is ourselves. We can look at it, we can feel it, we can hear it, we can taste it, we can smell it, we can dissect it, we can build on it, we can articulate it, we can reason about it, we can imagine it, we can dream of it, we can be it, we can be attracted to it, we can do it, as they say, we can fuck it, eat it and put it in a dumpster.

So, what is it? It’s you. Your body, your mind, your memories, your mental connection of interrelated concepts, your neurochemoelectrobiological processes and structures, your neuron cells, your hydrophobic cell walls, the enormous and unique molecule DNA that has created your body. Did God create billions of galaxies with billions of stars in each to fuse the tiny, teeny, really, really, really petite and wee lil little protons into atoms and blew up the stars like they were just flares that fizzle and die in a second? We’re really small compared to the star balls bursting while our sun is 4500 000 000 years old, as is the solar system, including earth but not the people who have lived here for not a very long time considering the threat of the bursting bubble overhead. But since we’re so small, we don’t have to worry about that happening any time soon. Instead we adapt to an environment which contains a sun, and an atmosphere, and gravity, and trees, and bugs, and water and carbon and nitrogen, which contain the same atoms that make up the DNA molecule. Wasn’t it clever of God to make everything out of the most common things, makes so much more sense. Almost so much sense it was self-evident and would happen even without a god just because of the laws of gravity and chemistry and matter and motion. Surely, it’d be hard to predict that humans would exist and we are unique, but the universe is material and it can be predicted, you just need more computational power than is in the universe to predict it, however, some predictions don’t need 100% accuracy. We can use our knowledge of the material world to explore ourselves, the universe and the smallest and biggest and oldest and fastest and the edges of the universe, although that might take millions of years and I’ll just mention it now and wont make it part of my election campaign for king of the universe in the year 232,100 ANNO DOMINI.

So, how can it be mental? We can study the body and compare objectively with each other and then compare that with our subjective experience. We find that it’s coherent to talk of the body as a material structure, a chemical signature in the universe, brought forth as a shield to protect and nourish the spread of the DNA molecule. That’s the meaning of life. As social and mental beings we don’t have to care about the meaning of life if we don’t want to. It is not coherent to talk about angels and gods and unicorns. Instead we ask if the body holds the answers to our souls and it turns out that the mind is produced by a machine which we can describe in detail down to the size of atoms, we even find the material causes of the mental experiences that proponents of metaphysics invoke as evidence for their immaterial claims. We can find the answers to deja vu, fear, vision, feelings, sex, the belief that the universe must be like humans, caring and willful, the belief that we are a magical constant that travels through time, but time is just a function of motion and we are not constant souls, we are new states of mind produces every new day, every time a single thing moves in the brain (except the sub/unconscious stuff), produced by the machine and always brand new. The reason we think we are continuous is because when our new us’ experience the world, the think about their past as it has been stored in the neurocellular structure and is activated by the input and roundput in the brain and upon remembering the past experiences of the body, we identify with that body, mistaking it for a soul.

Advertisements

One Battery for Each World Citizen

November 18, 2011

So, I was watching UR on Swedish State Television, about a monastery built 537 or something, with a burning bush in the monastery. Then followed a program of how to fix the climate problem/kick the green revolution into rolling. They talked a lot about the sun, carbon, nuclear power, reducing energy usage. I think we should only focus on the sun, it is big enough to satisfy our energy usage even if the poor countries use the same amount of energy as the rich countries do today and a lot more which is where we’re heading. In the future a lot more electronic devices will be used; in fact, the more electricity we have, the more new technical advances we’ll make. So, stop reducing energy usage, make the energy abundant instead.

(more…)

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem, Consciousness and Cosmology

February 16, 2011

Just found this on youtube and thought I’d use or abuse it to explain my thoughts on the matter.

(more…)

Quote of the Day: Nietzsche

May 11, 2010

“When one rows, it is not the rowing which moves the ship. Rowing is only a magical ceremony by means of which, one compels a demon to move the ship.”

A Brief History of Religion

February 1, 2010

Introduction: During the last few hundred thousand years, humans started talking. Before speech, we probably didn’t have a lot of articulated thoughts in our heads or any precise ideas of Gods. However, as time went on prophet-like, priest-like people suggested that there were immaterial forces behind material events like lightning, child-birth, death, rain, crop growth, and inside ourselves, inside animals, inside plants perhaps as well. Regardless, a multitude of Gods did exist and many people from all parts of the world still believe in a multitude of Gods, often choosing one of them as the most important one or as the only true God, sometimes in combination with any of the major religious movements mentioned below. Let’s assume that about 5,000 years ago, there were sky gods, fertility gods, battle gods et cetera; Most people were nomadic, but some were farmers, some were city-folk, some were monarchs and some were slaves.

Amendment: The evolution of mythology is very psychosocial. The Goddess usually represents the Earth, the universe, life, while the God represents the spirit, action and change. The male Marduk killed the Goddess and replaced her. Marduk was the favourite local God and to become top dog he had to destroy the old universe (the Goddess) and remake it. Yahweh was a thunder god, very manly. Then the apostles brought back the Goddess. They borrowed the virgin birth from the Greek tradition and it represents the spirit birth, because Jesus was more than a physical man and therefore not conceived through physical sex and penetration and sperms and eggs and DNA and moaning and physical pleasures and animal drives. Oden, the God of wisdom and death (calm reason, sex and death is today part of the Swedish stereotype), replaced Tyr, the sky God. Tyr represents the male courage of the spirit as he sacrifices his bodily hand to bind the Fenrir Wolf, who was so strong they had to bind him with a rope made by the dwarves out of the roots of the mountains, the rumble of the cats, the tendons of the bear, the breath of the fish, the beard of the women and the spit of the birds. In the old Testament the Messiah is not related to God, but in the New testament, the son replaces the father as the protagonist. The Greek mythology contains Gods that behave very human-like, they’re envious, greedy, foolish, loving. All religions are based on metaphors for psychological tides driving different societies, like the hunter-gatherers, the farmers and the city folks all emphasize very different aspects of existence. The evolution of mythology is also why you can see many different versions of creation myths within the same religion. And when you have a lot of different groups of people you get a mix of stories that might often contradict each other and leads to a huge pantheon and lots of demigods.

2nd amendment: Constantine continued a belief in the Sun, which in Swedish is still called sol. The Egyptians worshiped the Sun in the form of Ra, which was humanized as Amun-Ra, a God-head, a humanesque God at the top of a hierarchy, with the earthly ruler as second in command. Constantine was like the sun, unmovable from supremacy. This goes from the pharaohs to the Pope to George Bush and a long list of people in between.  Sol was replaced by Jesus and YHWH. This was part of a history of patriarchy that was more concerned with inter-human relations than Mother Earth. During the Axial Age Buddha and Socrates, brothers in pacifism, rebelled against the structure of society. Buddha deconstructing the Hindu pantheon and Socrates deconstructing the Greek pantheon. Buddhism created a more altruistic society in the East, but Socrates was sentenced to death. 2000 years after Socrates, Giordano Bruno was martyred for criticizing the Church and suggesting each star was a sun, an anarchic idea to the sun kings who have reigned from the Scorpion King 5000 years ago till this very day. 2500 years after Buddha, the Church still defends the Inquisition. These three people (and other of course) questioned society, not for their own gain or to create a new structure in which they were at the top, but to allow enlightenment to combat the structural errors that were produced by these top-down-led trial-and-error-evolving societies. The consequences of the suppression of this enlightenment in the West created the banking system, the inflation and the stock market, to name but a few evils of modern western life created by the top-down trial-and-error. It will take a huge amount of enlightenment to mend the problems this has created. There are a lot of positive things in society, but societal phenomenon like capitalism and official laws and hierarchies are wormly appendixes that need be removed for they have poisoned or killed too many innocent minds and given no real benefits to the metaphorical world soul.

Timeline:

80,000 years ago, Cave paintings in Africa. “The use of abstract symbolism on the engraved pieces of ochre and the presence of a complex tool kit suggests Middle Stone Age people were behaving in a cognitively modern way and had the advantages of syntactical language at least 80,000 years ago.”

32,000 years ago, Cave paintings in Europe and “‘the Lion Man’ found in the Hohlenstein-Stadel cave of Germany’s Swabian Alb and dated at 32,000 years old, is associated with the Aurignacian culture and is the oldest known anthropomorphic animal figurine in the world.”

12,000 years ago, Someone built the temple of Göbekli Tepe in Turkey.

4,000 years ago, The Gilgamesh epic tells the story of Gilgamesh who might have been the king of Uruk (present-day Iraq) about 700 years earlier. In the text Marduk is the highest God.

3,300 years ago. Egyptian pharaoh Akhenaten believes Aton, the sun/an aspect of Ra, is the one true God. The priests of Egypt undid his works when he died and told the new pharaoh, Akhenaten’s son, that he was not the image of Aten, Tutankhaten, but the image of Amun, Tutankhamun, because they thought Amun was the true God-king. Amun-Ra was long the highest God, depicted now as a human unlike all the other animal gods.

3,200 years ago, a priest in Mesopotamia named Sin-liqe-unninni adds stories like the flood myth (Noah’s Ark) to the Gilgamesh portfolio.

3,000 years ago, in or near where Iran is, a man named Zarathustra said that Ahura Mazda was the one true God and all other Gods were false Gods and zoroastrianism spread.

2,600 years ago, the worship of Amun-Ra in Egypt was replaced by the cult of Isis and Osiris.

2,600 years ago, somewhere in the middle-east, after the Babylonian captivity, King Josiah’s head priest “found” the laws of Moses and said that Jahve was the only true God and judaism spread. As a child-king he grew up in Judah, which had been controlled by the Assyrian Empire. His father had been named Amon, after the Egyptian sun god but after the collapse of the Empire, his father and grandfather were deemed heretics and the monotheistic belief in YHWH spread under his reign (the reign of his advisors).

2,600 year ago, in India, Prince Siddhatta Gautama said he didn’t care for the Hindu gods and became an enlightened agnostic ascetic and buddhism spread.

2,300 years ago, Aristotle in Greece combines science and Plato’s idealism in his magnum opus Metaphysics.

2,000 years ago, Jesus in Israel said the jewish priests were wrong and the Romans killed him.

1,700 years ago, in China, Guo Xiang embraced spontaneity and Daoism spread.

1,700 years ago, Constantine the Great in Constantinople said that Jesus was the son of God and Christianity spread.

1,700 years ago, King Ezana of Ethiopia also became a Christian and Christianity spread.

1,500 years ago, or something like that, Tyr is replaced by Odin as the God-head among Germanic peoples.

1,400 years ago, Mohammad was kicked out of Mecka, said both the jews and the christians were wrong and that Allah, the moon God, was actually the only God, retook Mecka and Islam spread.

1,350 years ago, Muhammad’s followers disagreed about the legitimacy of his heir to the earthly and heavenly throne and Islam split into Shia and Sunni, which eventually led to the beheading of Saddam Hussein a few years later.

1,300 years ago, Indian nobleman Parshvanatha “pulled a Buddha” and Jainism spread.

1,200 years ago, Adi Shankara in India told people that Brahman was the one true God and that everyone is God and Hindu monotheism spread.

500 years ago, Martin Luther in Germany said the catholic church was wrong to say you could pay money to be absolved of your sins, the pope banned him and protestantism spread.

500 years ago, King Henry VIII of England with neighbours, took 6 wives, beheaded 2 of them and created the Church of England when the pope disapproved.

200 years ago, U.S. American Joseph Smith said Jesus, after his death, went from Israel, across Asia, over the Bering strait, across North America, to New York, whence he ascended to Heaven. His followers, The Church of Latter Day Saints (mormons), is but one of several thousands of Christian denominations.

70 years ago, during the so called second world war, Japan and the US built landing strips on islands in the Pacific and cargo cults centered around the wish for the spirits to bring them more stuff from heaven arose. Wikipedia: “Cargo cults typically were created by individual leaders, or strong men in the Melanesian culture, and it is not at all clear if these leaders were genuine, or were simply running scams on gullible populations.” Sounds like a spot-on description of religion to me.

60 years ago, the 2,000 year old Dead Sea Scrolls are found, the oldest version of the Old Testament. The texts tell of wondrous things.*

50 years ago, Hindu monotheism spreads to the west in the form of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. (Krishna consciousness, pure consciousnss, Christ consciousness, Buddha, these are all metaphors for the immaterial God our souls are/are made of/belongs to/comes from. P.S. It would be infinitely cool if my mind was Vishnu)

0 years ago, the Roman Pope is still there today after 1,700 years of turmoil; a shining example of the patriarchy in the history of religion/humanity.

*”I saw many stars descend and cast themselves down from heaven… and behold they all let out their privy members, like horses, and began to cover the cows of the oxen, and they all became pregnant and bare elephants, camels, and asses…18. And I saw till the Lord came unto them and took in His hand the staff of His wrath, and smote the earth, and the earth clave asunder, and all the beasts and all the birds of the heaven fell from among those sheep, and were swallowed up in the earth and it covered them. 19. And I saw till a great sword was given to the sheep, and the sheep proceeded against all the beasts of the field to slay them, and all the beasts and the birds of the heaven fled before their face.” – Book of Enoch

From http://www.godchecker.com/pantheon/african-mythology.php:

“African Creator Gods seem to follow a distinctive pattern – they are all extremely dissatisfied with their creations. There is much shaking of heads, turning away in sorrow and avoidance of contact. The humans are left to fend for themselves. Attempts to regain contact with their God by building a heavenly ladder are the subject of many an unhappy legend. On the whole, African Gods don’t like to be pestered, and humans have to learn to be content with their lot.”

Also, I left out the entirety of  Oceanian and American religion, but you can see the pattern already I hope. For more insight, look up Quetzalcoatl, I’itoi and Dreamtime. It should be noted that the beliefs of most people in general are quite practical – Gods are often irrelevant in day-to-day matters or they are physically very real – while a comparatively few have formed very theoretical/philosophical/surreal ideas about the nature of everything. This is true for all peoples and places of the Earth, today as well as in history, and most likely in the future as well.

Think what you will of the accuracy of that clip, but videos are always fun.

God

January 28, 2010

I think the ideas of Plato, Adi Shankar and quantum mechanics’ infinite amount of dimensions work well together. Brahman = Plato’s ideal world and Reality, the manifested Atmans are examples of the infinite amount of universes. All reality, including time, concepts, matter and the experience of the self, are illusions, only God exists.

This idea is fine with me, to a certain degree. But Brahma/God IS an objective reality to some people, Brahma really does exist, if you believe in this form of Buddhism. As I see it, it doesn’t matter how aware you are of the fact that you’re delusional if you fail to see that you actually believe in a reality, no matter how transcendent, as I assume all buddhists do, despite calling themselves enlightened. Not talking about religious buddhists either, just philosphy.

Cuz really, what reason do we have to assume that the material reality is the illusion? We know we are delusional about the true nature of existence, but why assume that the true nature of existence is immaterial instead of material if we don’t have a clue to begin with?

Brahma is defined as the indescribable. For me, God is equated with “the unknowable”, not merely things that can’t be described by words, but pieces of existence that I don’t even know I don’t know about. It’s the blackness where my experienced universe is the light and I can’t even see the blackness, I can only see light.

So, for all practical purposes, the universe in my head is the universe i use to navigate through existence. But the true nature of reality is beyond me. However, at this point we can do what Descartes did, ask ourselves, what can we really be certain of.

“I am”, was his conclusion. But, “I am” is a circular definition. “am”, the idea of being, presupposes a subject or object, in this case I, that “is”. If we assume something exists, like we assume that a material or immaterial reality exists, we see that no matter how we manipulate our thoughts and language, we never free ourselves of our subjectively experienced universes. Like in my own case, in my world there are cucumbers, the colour green, bit of cords, supernovas, protons, and I necessarily form all my subsequent understandings based on this world-view. There is nothing I can be certain of, and at the same time I inevitably rely on my understanding of the universe, which is also true for my conclusion that there is nothing I can be certain of.

(Btw, if we can’t know anything for certain, then knowledge = belief). I believe that I am made from DNA. That is, 1 molecule, half of which comes from my dad and half from my mom, with some environmentally created chemical/radiation mutations and further upbringing factors added, which copied itself according to its own inbuilt map, and was and is me. The cell is like a bacteria, and before multicellular organisms arose less than 1 billion years ago, bacteria was the most complex form of life for more than twice as long, and they still exist. (Virus is like bacteria but without the cell structure, it’s like free radicals of DNA on the loose.) Is this material view right or wrong? Well, for all practical purposes it’s much better than saying “I don’t exist” (“I am not”).

The idea of a mind is part of my mind. An immaterial, unique mind that arose from a singular dual complex material molecule in a universe that is homogenous or heterogenous as strings or random fluctuations, which are the cause of the universe going from non-existing to existing and all these words are just different definitions on different levels of perspective for the very same universe. Is it coincidence that the earth and the atom are both spherical and unison, which might lead people to see the universe as infinite repetition where atoms in my foot are galaxies or universes in which other tiny sentient beings like ourselves exist, while everything on a visual level got edges, finite objects that are easier to grasp, both physically and mentally? It might be, how on earth should I know whether its by accident or not; whether it’s a reflection of how my mind works or not? A pattern is not necessarily devised. (Creationism is bullshit btw, but i think we’re beyond that already.)

However, I always return to consciousness, it seems to be a focal point, accidental or not doesn’t help me understand. A focal point is in itself more interesting than telling. The idea of oneness is an axiom of math. It’s an assumption that cannot be proven or disproven. And we base all our scientific understanding on this intuitive assumption, even when the resulting theory is counter-intuitive, like black holes and extra dimensions. (My intuition tells me black holes are no different from other material phenomena. People seem to think they’re supernatural, like the speed of light. It makes a tiny bit of sense to say something is immaterial in the sense that it’s below sub-atomic level if light is the building blocks of particles. But then most likely light can be divided into sub-particles itself. Either way, silicon melts into glass, carbon becomes diamonds under pressure, iron is fused in stars, what kind of processes and products can we expect to exist at the core of a black hole?)

Oneness links the multitude of Atmans to the one Brahman. The concept of transcendence enables 1=2. When we have a subject-object relationship, we can say that 1) only the subject exists, 2) only the object exists, 3) only the relation exists, 4) only an underlying thing exists, 5) any combination of the 4. Come to think of it, it all seems more like mind-play than enlightenment. It’s not really an explanation to say that reality doesn’t exist, it’s just caused by God, which is the thing that actually exists; or to say that it’s neither the object in the mind or the mind itself that exists, it’s the process of the mind that actually exists. You must remember that all these ideas are constructed by humans. They may be very intelligent, but they’re not omniscient. So-called enlightened people are still mere congregations of carbohydrates.

“Some medieval Christian mystics argued that it is incorrect to say that God exists, because existence amounts to taking a particular form within a space of time. God has no particular form and is outside of time. Therefore, God does not exist. However, God is. That’s an argument that many of us atheistic Buddhists can appreciate.”

If God doesn’t exist in a sense of the word exist that humans can talk about, then we can’t talk about God. God is the unknowable and indescribable and for all pruposes in reality does not exist and has no attributes. What’s the point of a God without attributes? Without attributes we don’t know if it’s a He, if it is omniscient, if it has a will, if it lives anywhere, if it created anything. We’ve reduced the concept of god to nothingness, to blackness, to the absence of everything, to the unknowable. God is dead, as it were. We’re left with the material world as the sole guide to understanding existence and we are very uncertain about the material world so we must be very uncertain of what existence is, for it is, isn’t it? Or what’s really going on? Why do I think? This question repeats itself forever, my thoughts are all circular definitions repeating themselves in new versions, avatars, of themselves every time I write a new sentence or my neurons reform from new experiences. Inventing brains in a vat is no different from inventing a God or an ideal world or any form of duality. It’s just adding a magical unknowable to the knowable and the error lies in the description of the magical unknowable because by definition we can’t know it. Therefore any attempt to describe a God beyond our knowledge is stupid. It might be true, but it is pointless to say so since we can’t know the anything about such a God.

This applies to free will as well. We have cause and effect. This means that all the input into your brain results in an output determined by the laws that govern electricity and chemical and biological reactions in your brain. Even quantum randomness is part of the predetermined reactions, unless that is how God’s free will affects the material world, but given the history of science it’s more likely we don’t fully understand what’s going on down on that level yet so maybe wait a bit before supposing magical and supernatural forces. Either way, on a neurological level there is no such randomness, all mental activities are possible to describe with simple molecular processes. Compare it to real numbers, like 1, 2 and 3. 1+2=3. There’s no room for a random factor in that equation. Similarly there is no room in the brain for a free will. If there was a free will it would be able to alter the effects that would occur on their own, and since all our decisions can be reduced to and explained by naturally occurring phenomena, like biology and environment to put it simplistically, there is no place for a magically affecting thingy.

The universe explains itself to itself like a dream within a dream and it thinks it is God but it’s clueless beyond it’s self.

31 US States have now Banned Gay Marriages

November 5, 2009

Today the people of Maine voted against gay marriages by a narrow 53 percent votes for the ban and 47 percent against the ban. So far 31 states have voted on the issue and all 31 have voted for a ban. Five states have allowed gay marriages, but not by a popular referendum.

As a comparison, last month, the Swedish Lutheran Church (the former Swedish state church which still has three quarters of the Swedish population as registered members) voted for allowing gay marriages. Some bishops protested but the majority of church leaders have decided that God does not think homosexuality is immoral. However, in the US, God thinks homosexuality is immoral. So, either there are different Gods with different opinions on the issue or the one and only God needs to employ a new head of PR. However, I won’t discuss whether homosexuality is immoral or not according to God, because I don’t believe in God, so God’s opinion on the matter is irrelevant to me.

People who are against homosexuality but don’t refer to God’s morals usually say that homosexuality is unnatural and therefore wrong; sex is between a man and a woman, the penis fits into the vagina like a hand in a glove (size, shape and odour may differ, which is true for hands and gloves as well). This is not a good argument, because humans do a lot of things not just meant to further their genes; like going to the movies, chewing gum, masturbating, hugging, listening to music et cetera. Having a penis in your mouth or in your ass is no more or less natural whether you’re a girl or a boy. It’s just a matter of recreation, what we do for fun or for pleasure. As long as it’s consensual – as long as nobody gets hurt, no activity is ever wrong. This goes for gay guys, lesbians, bisexuals, group-sex participants et cetera as well as for all activities that have nothing to do with sex.

Thousands of animal species are less homophobic than humans. Like chimpanzees. And don’t get me started on plant reproduction.

Also, it doesn’t matter why a person has its sexual preferences, whether it’s genetic or environment, because we all have different taste in wine, music, sex partners, television shows, seasons, wall papers et cetera. It’s just the way it is and there is no judge as to what is right or wrong when it comes to taste, as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else. (Having a taste for genocide is probably a very bad thing…)

Today We Celebrate Midsummer’s Eve

June 19, 2009

Now it’s not Eve in Eden, it’s a pagan festival. We’re celebrating the arrival of the sun. The sun, being the original God in all mythology, is worshipped and to it we sacrifice (eat) herring, unborn chicken and alcohol. Tomorrow is one of the top death days in Swedish traffic, drunk single men aged 18-24 probably being the most common among victims.

Maypole, actually a Midsummerpole, but these two celebrations got mixed up along history.

Maypole, actually a Midsummer pole, but these two celebrations got mixed up along history.

The pole is a penis, with balls to each side, penetrating mother earth.

“It is arguably the most important holiday of the year, and one of the most uniquely Swedish in the way it is celebrated, even if it has been influenced by other countries long ago. The main celebrations take place on the Friday, and the traditional events include raising and dancing around a huge maypole. One typical dance is the frog dance. Before the maypole is raised, greens and flowers are collected and used to cover the entire pole….The year’s first potatoes, pickled herring, sour cream, and possibly the first strawberries of the season are on the menu. Drinking songs are also important at this feast, and many drink heavily.” -wikipedia

Strawberries are coincidentally called jordgubbar, “earth-men” in Swedish. No connection to the male pole in the ground though.

Some argue that the pole “was a phallic fertility symbol, meant to impregnate the earth, but as there were no records from those times it cannot be proven, and this idea might just be a modern interpretation of the poles form.” -wiki

Don’t believe everything that is written…

“The Edicts of Ashoka are a collection of 33 inscriptions on the Pillars of Ashoka, as well as boulders and cave walls, made by the Emperor Ashoka of the Mauryan dynasty during his reign from 272 to 231 BC. These inscriptions are dispersed throughout the areas of modern-day Pakistan and India, and represent the first tangible evidence of Buddhism.

Although Buddhism and the Buddha are mentioned, the edicts of Ashoka tend to focus on social and moral precepts rather than religious practices. No mention is made of the philosophical dimension of Buddhism, such as the Four Noble Truths or the Eightfold Path. This could possibly be because Ashoka wanted to remain simple in his message to the public, because these notions may have been formalized at a later date, or some combination of the two.

The inscriptions revolve around a few repetitive themes: Ashoka’s conversion to Buddhism, the description of his efforts to spread Buddhism, his moral and religious precepts, and his social and animal welfare program.” -wiki

Edict quotes:

“Happiness in this world and the next is difficult to obtain without much love for the Dhamma, much self-examination, much respect, much fear (of evil), and much enthusiasm.”

“One benefits in this world and gains great merit in the next by giving the gift of the Dhamma.”

Dharma is the law of Buddhism, and it’s the ultimate reality, das Ding an Sich, at the same time. The idea that there are universal rules, maybe an intelligent design, at least a reason behind it, a free will or force, an original cause is common to at least all religions and probably most philosophies as well.

Descartes’ worn-out “I think, therefore I am” is a statement of cause and effect. Kant almost trips himself up dwindling through the definitions of categories, concepts, objects in relation to pure, or general, or intuited understanding and the syntheses whose foundations rest on themselves and their relation to the other constructs of the mind.

Sorry about that sentence, I only meant to say that Kant, too, finds reason behind everything.

The people who are against Intelligent Design say that the universe does not need a consciousness to will it into being, while people who are positive to the Big Bang-theory believe that even unconscious, there has to be an ultimate cause behind everything. I would say that no, there doesn’t have to be anything behind everything, “everything” is quite enough without the add-on of a Derridian urtrace, an Urkraft, an ultimate cause.

In our perceived reality everything has a cause, within the constraints of the conception of  time, so if we search the material world for the cause behind every cause we will eventually stagger into, well, nothing, there is no wall, we will continue endlessly, because every cause has it’s cause, there is no ultimate cause.

The idea of a wall is the idea that every object has to have an end, in space, the other basic fundament of the mind Kant mentions together with time. We split things into groups and unique entities by relativity. Either we categorize it according to a similarity and group it, make it an object in a subset, or according to it’s dissimilarities, which is the basic principle of the mind according to Kant; namely unifying the manifold that is everything.

We draw an arbitrary line in the sand and we call everything within soul and everything without the world. But the line is in-discrete and flows in a continuous spectrum. If you cut a finger off, are you still you? If you = your body, then at the loss of a finger, you have diminished. The mind is flexible and adapts to this new circumstance putting the limit along a different line.

Basically, what we do is split the universe into two, an ego and the rest. Buddhists finding Nirvana say they strip themselves of all preconceived layers of the material world, let go of all definitions and let the world unfold as a mono-complex, in which first they see themselves as the one unit, then they turn their gaze around and see instead the rest as a unit. They see the universe as if it was all one whole, which must be a pretty nice sight, much like this artificial image of Kilimanjaro:

Kilimanjaro is an inactive stratovolcano in north-eastern Tanzania, the highest peak in Africa at 5,891.8 metres.

Kilimanjaro is an inactive stratovolcano in north-eastern Tanzania, the highest peak in Africa at 5,891.8 metres.

My idea is that everything is one thing, but then the mind separates it into two, I imagine a blue line around the body, or around a 1-dimensional (not possible) dot in the brain; this blue halo looks like what I imagine a soul would look like. The rest of the universe is also encircled in a blue shiny band. The blue light is imaginary though, it’s a monkey that has defined itself this way. Otherwise we couldn’t separate chairs from haircuts and dogs from giraffes and would be completely useless to bring home dinner. So we draw lines, defining things, starting with separating 1 –> 2, which is logically important and mathematically hilarious.

For practical purposes we can reflect upon our own thoughts, but only memories as self-reflection only studies the past actions and decisions of the body.  We can’t think of future thoughts, because they haven’t happened in time yet. Therefore we define ourselves according to the stable part of our universe, the self, which appear to remain the same despite the world constantly revolving and reshaping before its eyes.

We need a solid basis from which to comprehend reality so that we can walk around and do things in it. We don’t will this though, our self-reflection is involuntary, it starts without us having to will it and it decides our future brain patterns and future actions, based on our previous ones. An ultimate cause, an original force or will of the mind is superfluous, is not needed.

If the universe is random, it must be the way it is among an infinite amount of possibilities, which makes it unique. But just because it is a certain unique way does not require that it was intelligent design. The random nature of the universe would be enough to explain that it is the way it is, because it had to be one way if it must be any way of all ways.

Similarly, everything just is the way it is, without an ultimate cause or reason or will, which means that the world-view in each individual is a result of the fact that if it has to be some way it became this way, which is just as likely as any other way among infinite possibilities. There is no necessity in explaining why life, experience, consciousness, being or whatever we call it, feels the way it does, because there is no ultimate reason behind everything (which is kinda obvious already in the word everything *chuckles*).

The idea that 1=1 is an assumption, and on this assumption we base all of mathematics and physics. The idea of oneness is however a consequence of the mind having separated the world into two 1’s, despite calling it universe (uni means one) and not two-verse (again the hint is in the word, hoho..)

Yeah, so the question begs, what is “the rest”. Well, everything that is part of a person’s world-view forms that ego, so the rest must be everything that has not come into contact with the person, i.e. the unknown. The nature of God is all that which is not in our mind, the blackness without the soul, which we identify ourselves with because God, just like the ego, is a unit of a complex manifold, only God is the other end of the spectrum in which we drew the arbitrary line in the sand of space-time, not because of any particular reason, but because we had to draw it somewhere, or at least, when considering this analogy, one must define reality as a place where you draw imaginary lines, while in actuality it’s just another metaphor for everything, just like the idea of a metaphor is just a metaphor for an in-discrete part of reality. Part, here, being understood as a Ding encircled in a shiny blue coat.

Something funny:

Something not so funny: