meta-theism

I've often said to people that I discuss it in detail and at length with, that
'atheism' is a problematic, annoying word to describe what I really think.

What I really think is that a 'yes or no' answer to a question which 'begs the
question' is ridiculous.

For example:

Do triangular poodles vibrate?
a) Yes, I am a triangular-poodle-'vibrationalist'
b) No, I am an triangular-poodle-'Avibrationalist'
c) I don't know, I'm a t.p.v. 'agnostic'

I vote:
d) none of the above--what a silly question. -(the
t.v.p.-'meta-vibrationalist')

Putting it another way, a person can say that there are purple shoulder
fairies who have reserved an eternal punishment for you if you don't believe
in them. One might respond: 'How ridiculous! Purple Shoulder Fairies don't
exist' and the believer says: 'You can't prove they don't so they must',
which of course, would be a fallacy (alas, a common argument delivered by
theists with little else to present in favor of their views besides threats).

Plug in 'God' for the 'fairies' and you see how I view these claims. Better
yet, plug in 'Zeus' for fairies, and you'll see how I cannot understand the
certainty and arrogance with which many state their beliefs and criticise all
manner of non-believers: Do they not see that whole societies have come and
gone who held _Zeus_ to be the Almighty?

My response to those who ask 'Do you believe in God?' :
'I don't know, do you believe in Zeus?'

As for the so-called 'Pascal's Wager' argument, it also applies to every
religion imaginable, so its effect gets 'cancelled out' when viewed as a
whole.

So, for me, the God question never has and possibly never will make sense,
since what people identify as their God is either:
1) really specific, but not very believable, or extremely childish and naive
to me, and accompanied by all sorts of psychological brainwashing to keep the
idea of 'faith' and 'belief' alive, particularly threats of 'damnation'. Mind
control and fascism at its worst. Or,
2) objectively vague--not really specific enough to be something I could
confirm or deny as being true. Or, most commonly:
3) subjectively vague--in which case no two people agree what 'God' means as
a word to them. This is the whole 'New Age' movement to me.

Because I have not scoured the universe and overturned every rock, my
disbelief in God cannot rightly come from a sense of certainty that She
*doesn't* exist. It comes from another 'faith' of a sort--that the universe
just doesn't work in the way that *most* religions describe it to work, at
least physically speaking. And sometimes (I would even argue that most of the
time), they get the morality/spirituality all wrong too: witness the endless
cruelty and genocide in the Old Testament and other central texts of the
major world faiths.

For lack of a better word for it, I would say I'm a meta-theist. With a great
respect for Buddhism, which is a meta-theistic spirituality that apparantly
'gets it right' more than any other world religion, IMO.

-Aaron.

I agree with you on this one,
so what would god be like if it did work the way you perceive it.
taking Dante cue of as many religion as people

Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:

>--that the universe >just doesn't work in the way that *most* religions describe it to work, at >least physically speaking. >
> >

--
Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

On Monday 31 October 2005 5:45 pm, Kraig Grady wrote:
> I agree with you on this one,
> so what would god be like if it did work the way you perceive it.
> taking Dante cue of as many religion as people

Maybe a God I could believe in was to find out that the universe itself was a
kind of giant brain, and we were just part of it?

I don't know how such a thing could be shown to be from within it, so I doubt
it is something that could be pursued....

> Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
> >--that the universe
> >just doesn't work in the way that *most* religions describe it to work, at
> >least physically speaking.

Neat post Aaron; thanks.

-Carl

> Maybe a God I could believe in was to find out that the universe
> itself was a kind of giant brain, and we were just part of it?

Well, the idea that the universe is a computer that we are part
of is finally getting some attention.

> I don't know how such a thing could be shown to be from within
> it, so I doubt it is something that could be pursued....

It could be shown if a simulation of the universe could predict
events in the rest of the universe. One way this might be
possible is if local events turn out not to depend much on
nonlocal events. In that case you could use a computer to
predict events in a certain area of space.

-Carl

one implication is that it is something right here , not separate from matter,
that it is in a constant state of realizing itself, hence evolves.

Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:

>On Monday 31 October 2005 5:45 pm, Kraig Grady wrote:
> >
>>I agree with you on this one,
>>so what would god be like if it did work the way you perceive it.
>>taking Dante cue of as many religion as people
>> >>
>
>Maybe a God I could believe in was to find out that the universe itself was a >kind of giant brain, and we were just part of it?
>
>I don't know how such a thing could be shown to be from within it, so I doubt >it is something that could be pursued....
>
>
> >
>>Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
>> >>
>>>--that the universe
>>>just doesn't work in the way that *most* religions describe it to work, at
>>>least physically speaking.
>>> >>>
>
>
>
>Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
>To unsubscribe, send an email to:
>metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
>To post to the list, send to
>metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
>You don't have to be a member to post.
>
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> >
>
>
> >

--
Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main.html> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@a...>
wrote:

> So, for me, the God question never has and possibly
> never will make sense, since what people identify as
> their God is either:
> 1) really specific, but not very believable, or extremely
> childish and naive to me, and accompanied by all sorts of
> psychological brainwashing to keep the idea of 'faith' and
> 'belief' alive, particularly threats of 'damnation'. Mind
> control and fascism at its worst. Or,
> 2) objectively vague--not really specific enough to be
> something I could confirm or deny as being true. Or,
> most commonly:
> 3) subjectively vague--in which case no two people agree
> what 'God' means as a word to them. This is the whole
> 'New Age' movement to me.

I go for #3 ... my specific belief is that propounded
by Mahler, and supposedly by Christ too: "God is love".

Just my 2 cents in this twisted thread.

-monz