G.O.D.’s health warning The pantheist’s1 inference2: For ‘god’ (Greek theos) experience3: a constraint applying as a rule.4 For ‘G.O.D.’5 (writ large)
infer: the rule of rules set, meaning: a common rules set from which all
uncommon6 rules sets emerge.7 For ‘g.o.d.’ (writ small) experience:
a differentiation of the rule of rules sets.8 For ‘set’ read: a selection, hence
group ≈ eco of rules. A constraint (i.e. a rule, i.e. as
G.O.D. or as its differential copy, i.e. g.o.d.) demands compliance ‘or
else’.9 Non-compliance results in elimination. © 2018 by
Victor Langheld |
1. A pantheist (i.e. an ‘all is god’ believer) is
someone (i.e. an ecological system ≈ an eco) who complies with and so
applies the survival rules common, i.e. natural, to all (ecos). For ‘eco’
read: an identifiable reality, i.e. an ecological system. For ‘pan’ read: ALL
identifiable realities. For ‘common’ read: general, universal. 2. Since the 21st century pantheist’s actual
world (or universe) happens as iconic simulation (of externally accessed,
i.e. touched by Big Data) in her brain, hence as a virtual reality, that
simulation can only ever be a severely limited and skewed inference about the
source of the BIG Data and its self-ordering and self-organisation rules (i.e.
G.O.D.), albeit accepted (i.e. verified) as (personally ≈ locally) true
by subsequent inference confirming data. In short, true is what is personally
confirmed, i.e. reality tested and so personally verified. 3. Identifiable realities, hence the and all worlds,
emerge because the unidentified substrate or ground (quanta) interacts via
contact, meaning touch. In other words, all identifiable realities, i.e. all ecos
as surface structures, emerge as touch screens that ‘(re-)play’ processed
previous contact/touch sequences (self-simulated as knowledge). Hence a
contact/touch, i.e. a moment of absolute realness, is self-defined as a
quantum of knowledge (Latin scientia),
to wit, ‘I know because I’ve experienced (i.e. been touched).’ That all
worlds happen as iconic displays of (Big Data) touch sequences was clearly
understood 2500 years ago by the Shakyamuni Buddha who declared that:
‘Consciousness (and the other 4 aggregates) arises from contact.’ 4. A ‘constraint applying as a rule’ serves as an order
(or command). A constraint, as contact, blocks, stops and so makes real. A
series (or set) of constraints/rules emerge as identity. 5. The modern pantheist understands the word ‘God’ as an
acronym, i.e. as G.O.D., standing for ‘General Ordering Device.’ For
‘general’ read: common, equivalent (≈) to universal. Pantheists (like
henotheists ≈ ecotheists) may or may not anthropomorphise, indeed
personalise their notion of G.O.D., depending on (personal or popular) need. 6. For ‘uncommon’ read: specifically limited, meaning
particular or differential, thus (uncommon) local, hence niche application (≈
enforcement or implementation). For instance, the rules of a game are common.
The rules as applied differentially during an actual game are uncommon. All
humans have, in principle, a common architecture. Each individual human has
an uncommon because differential application thereof. 7. The common rules set (i.e. G.O.D.) can only be
inferred (i.e. abstracted weakly) from actual, hence uncommon applications as
local (i.e. g.o.d) rules sets. In other words, the common rules of football
can only be inferred (i.e. abstracted) from an actual football game, the
inference being ‘strengthened, hardened’ towards truth/fact by statistically
significant numbers. The common rules of games (i.e. of fantasies, religious
or otherwise) and their emerging affects, as such, i.e. of gaming as such, can
also be (weakly) inferred (i.e. abstracted) from an actual game of football
or from any actual or virtual (i.e. imaginary) game, In ancient Indian and
Chinese times the relationship between the rule of rules, i.e. the basic
operating system of rules, and the differential rules emerging during local
implementation was verbalised as: ‘Thou art THAT’ or as ‘The suchness of this’ness.’
Hence pantheists experience G.O.D. (i.e. theos) in the common (i.e. the
ordinary as ground) and henotheists ( ≈ ecotheists) in the uncommon (i.e.
in the ‘stars’above.) 8. i.e. ‘g.o.d’ as local application running, as differential,
albeit wholly recursive G.O.D. copy, on the basic ordering operating system
(i.e. G.O.D.). 9. Hence all rules/constraints serve not as commands
but as health warnings, meaning, as in Genesis2: 16&17 : ‘Don’t do this
or you will die.’ Since the next most efficient survival-as-continuance step
is unpredictable, ‘mortal combat’ (i.e. competition) decides the compliant,
i.e. the (Darwinian, hence nature’s ≈ G.O.D.’s) fittest/best (as local g.o.d)
as local G.O.D upgrades and the next step. |