Pantheism updated
|
A modern
pantheist’s GOD definition The pantheist, as monist, gives the
name, tag, title or reference GOD
to an inferred one universal
and automatic procedure that enables the emergence of n identifiable realities. Each of n
emerged identified realities is understood by the pantheist as a god. Gods
in turn enable the further emergence of n identifiable realities. GOD, as non-emerging, hence unidentifiable procedure
and the gods, as emerged
identifiable and thus real procedural outcomes, are deemed
identical. © 2020 by Victor Langheld |
Analysis The pantheist, as monist, gives the
name,1 tag, title or reference GOD
to an inferred one universal
and automatic procedure2 that enables the emergence of n identifiable
realities.3 Each of n
emerged identified realities is understood by the pantheist4 as a god. Gods5
in turn enable the further emergence of n identifiable realities. GOD, as non-emerging, hence unidentifiable procedure6
and the gods, as emerged
identifiable and thus real procedural outcomes, are deemed
identical.7,8 © 2020 by Victor Langheld |
1. The abstract name GOD
is my personal preference. Other pantheists (i.e. monists all) use the name nature. The God
of the (dualist) theist, i.e. henotheist, emerges as a secondary primus inter
pares god. The pantheist conceives of
his/her GOD as natura naturans and of
the theist’s God as cultura culturans. The latter emerges as artificial (i.e. man made) procedure designed to increase the survival
capacity of a selected (i.e. chosen) group whereby culturans overrides naturans. 2. A procedure is defined as a limited (hence
quantised), thus limiting series of constraints. All procedures, both the
universal (i.e. common) one named GOD and those adapted from (hence secondary to)
it, named gods, emerge as reactions
(to random momentum = energy). In other words, GOD,
so the pantheist believes, does not act/create but reacts to random momentum,
i.e. energy (turbulence, so the Buddha). Likewise do GOD’s
tweaked (i.e. adapted) elaborations, i.e. the gods
react rather than act. In other words, the entire
identifiable and real universe and which consists of all identifiable
realities emerges as reaction (to random momentum possibly triggered by a Big
Bang). 3. Both identity (i.e. constraint difference, emerging
as attribute) and realness (i.e. the affect of
non-penetration) resulting from absolute constraint) happen as discrete (i.e.
quantised) emergents. As quantised, momentary
outcomes of the GOD procedure the
pantheist names them gods (to wit, naturata). 4. At the risk of being stoned, beheaded or burnt alive
(like Giordano Bruno) by fanatic theists. 5. i.e. differentiated GOD (procedure)
adaptations (or elaborations), i.e. localised (i.e. differently
constrained) GOD apps. That is to say, gods run the same emergence procedure as GOD albeit in a limited (i.e. more constrained)
way, thus actualising as localities or eco-systems. Adaptations (i.e. the gods) are recursive, i.e. they repeat the
original procedure albeit with a differential twist. 6. Such as an unlimited Universal Turing Machine =
procedure. The UTM functions as
reactive non-random procedure (of constraints = rules) that constrains (i.e.
orders) (available) random data (i.e. input variables) into quantised (thus
decided, thus complete) outputs which in turn serve as non-random constraints
(i.e. as limited (universal) Turing Machines). In short, GOD is understood as universal (energy)
ordering device (that is to say, as constraints or rules set) and god as its decided (thus
identified and real) output (or rule). 7. In the ancient Indian religious anthology the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (approx. 2500 BC), the unlimited
not yet differentiated universal emergence procedure (i.e. GOD) was called (nirguna)
Brahman (neuter) and the limited, thus differentiated (hence with attributes)
universal emergence procedure, i.e. the god,
the (saguna) Brahman, alias Atman. Brahman (i.e. GOD) as unlimited emergence procedure and Atman
(i.e. god) as repeating limited
emergence procedure were deemed identical. Hence: ‘Aham
Brahman asmi.’ The Brahman was defined as: ‘The one without a second.’
The second were n
Atmans. Atmans serve as a local Brahman
adaptations. 8. The gods
emerge as (secondary) differentiated states of constraints (thus order), that
is to say, as GOD’s (i.e. as
primary or basic ordering (i.e. constraining) procedure) reaction (or
response) to disorder (i.e. momentum randomness, chaos, entropy and so on).
If GOD is conceived as basic (or ground,
so Meister Eckhart) ordering (i.e. constraining) platform, then the gods emerge from/as its limited
variations/adaptations. |