• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

The Death of God

G

Ginkgo

Guest
A common argument in Western Society is that biological evolution disproves the Judeo-Christian god because it dismisses the literal Biblical creation story as myth. However, I think that this is only a superficial argument that does not address the root of how God is "killed" for many.

I think the death of "God" comes when one reconsiders the way one understands with the world on a psychological level, thereby creating new symbols for the affiliation one has with the world. For instance, the conflict between the Day and Night is not a literal "conflict", but rather a personification of our own conflicted psyche; and similarly, the conflict between God and Satan is a personification of our own psychological war between good and evil.

Our psychological conflicts are just platforms for denotations, and those denotations are subject to our individual experiences. Quite often those experiences are influenced by cultural strains who foster the veneration of specific symbols; and culture clash occurs when one culture's symbol opposes another. On a microscopic level, this even happens between individuals. For instance, an Atheist may clash with a Theist, but they only clash because they fail to recognize that they are venerating different symbols by the same fundamental subconscious motivations.

So, for all intents and purposes, the subconscious "God" never dies, nor do we kill it. We just resurrect it by our own avatars so that it may be used to communicate with others.
 

Arthur Schopenhauer

What is, is.
Joined
May 1, 2010
Messages
1,158
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5
I am under the personal impression that god can only be dead once the idea of god has been discarded by the majority, or perhaps, everyone. It seems to me that god is only a concept, and his life, his existence, is limited to the willingness of the human mind to accept him as an absolute living being that does exist. Humanity breathed life into god, they raised him from the dirt and gave him life, but they have only done this conceptually. I think, an example of a dead god, would be an ancient being such as Zeuss, or Ra, or Odin, because no one believes in those gods, so they are dead.

Although, I doubt it is completely possible for us to remove the entire concept of god entirely. But, as for these spiritual gods, perhaps. I personally think it would be a shame if the concept of god was lost entirely... What then would we strive to surpass?
 

Litvyak

No Cigar
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
1,822
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
To me, the concept of God being dead means abandoning the myth of superhuman entities creating, controlling and/or observing our lives as it proved to be an unsatisfying answer for the great questions of humanity at a certain point of its evolution. Instead of ending our childhood obsession with fake paternal figures, we've traded this myth for another one, the myth of science, believing that "enlightenment" is enough in itself to lead us to collective security and happiness. Surrounded by thousands of laputan machines and millions of miserable people, it is safe to say that we're starting to abandon this myth along the former one, or rather, it is abandoning us.

The hole is yet to be filled.
I bet reality shows can do it, though!

0213r2.jpg
 

Desert

New member
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
32
MBTI Type
intj
I just find it interesting that those who do not believe in God so desperately want to see him dead
 
O

Oberon

Guest
In the post-modern worldview, the state has taken the place that God once occupied in the psyche during the more thoroughly theistic times in western history. Whereas before people trusted to God to see to their needs, today people increasingly put their trust in a benevolent Government.

I suspect that their disillusionment will be along shortly.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Messages
7,312
MBTI Type
INTJ
A common argument in Western Society is that biological evolution disproves the Judeo-Christian god because it dismisses the literal Biblical creation story as myth.

It's also a common fallacy, as a minority of Christian sects hold that the Biblical creation story is literally true.
 

Take Five

Supreme Allied Commander
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
925
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
1w9
In the post-modern worldview, the state has taken the place that God once occupied in the psyche during the more thoroughly theistic times in western history. Whereas before people trusted to God to see to their needs, today people increasingly put their trust in a benevolent Government.

I suspect that their disillusionment will be along shortly.

YES!!!!
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
In the post-modern worldview, the state has taken the place that God once occupied in the psyche during the more thoroughly theistic times in western history. Whereas before people trusted to God to see to their needs, today people increasingly put their trust in a benevolent Government.

I suspect that their disillusionment will be along shortly.

This was actually what I was thinking about (for a long time, actually), but I also see that science attempts to fill the void as a conductor for truth/fact. One of the more fledgling sciences is psychology, which is, in essence, a study of how we process information. In effect, we process how we process.

People have been disillusioned with government since there was government to begin with. Are you saying that clinging to the government in place of God is trend in contemporary United States? 'Course. Especially if we are leaning into socialism.
 
O

Oberon

Guest
People have been disillusioned with government since there was government to begin with.

Yes, that's true, but before the 20th century government was understood to fit within a framework of human structures, all under the power of God. What we have now is different, i.e. government occuping the psychic niche formerly occupied by God. This leads to a great many consequences; for example, participation in civic duty and especially in the institution of social justice by legislation may be treated as a moral imperative; those who do not share in the faith-in-government may be treated as heretics; those who expect government to rescue them from various hardships become unable or unwilling to take initiative; and so on.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
Yes, that's true, but before the 20th century government was understood to fit within a framework of human structures, all under the power of God. What we have now is different, i.e. government occuping the psychic niche formerly occupied by God. This leads to a great many consequences; for example, participation in civic duty and especially in the institution of social justice by legislation may be treated as a moral imperative; those who do not share in the faith-in-government may be treated as heretics; those who expect government to rescue them from various hardships become unable or unwilling to take initiative; and so on.

I agree and disagree. Many of our governmental structures and social structures are based on theological axioms (if not deistic axioms). Or, rather, they allow for religious freedom, but as time has elapsed, they have demanded that religion be a separate entity from state. So now people are torn between their own faiths and the state, and once the faiths are expunged, the state will be the only common denominator. So what was once religious freedom soon becomes religious oppression.

On a side note, do you think there is a trend in youth becoming lazier because they expect the government to swoop in and save them?
 

ragashree

Reason vs Being
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
1,770
MBTI Type
Mine
Enneagram
1w9
I think a being capable of creating the universe from nothing is quite capable of existing independent of whether such pathetic creatures as ourselves choose to believe in said being. This debate is not very interesting to me for the simple reason that humans cannot under any reasonable philosophical model cause an eternal, omnipotent and omnipresent being to be "dead" any more than they can cause it to be "alive". They can believe or disbelieve in it, as they choose, but its existence or non-existence will nevertheless be independent of what people choose to concoct in their own minds. "I/we/society does not believe in God" does not equate to "God does not exist."

Oberon and Fmw, good points by the way.
 
O

Oberon

Guest
I agree and disagree. Many of our governmental structures and social structures are based on theological axioms (if not deistic axioms). Or, rather, they allow for religious freedom, but as time has elapsed, they have demanded that religion be a separate entity from state. So now people are torn between their own faiths and the state, and once the faiths are expunged, the state will be the only common denominator. So what was once religious freedom soon becomes religious oppression.

I don't think the increased faith in government is a function of government, not even in the US (where the process is as you describe). I think the increased faith in government is an outgrowth of a variety of 19th- and 20th-century ideas working to their ultimate conclusions. The industrial revolution and the incredible burst of technology that accompanied it made the world look increasingly different. Entire generations of people were born in the era of the steam railroad, and died in the era of the jet airplane. Along with this great change came philosophical ideas with real-world ramifications, such as Darwin's premise in The Origin of Species which appeared at first glance to eliminate the need for a Creator. Existentialism was a consequence of Darwin and Marxism was a consequence of the Industrial Revolution. Man and Man's achievements increasingly became the center of Man's world, and God became smaller and smaller in the average person's cognitive map.

On a side note, do you think there is a trend in youth becoming lazier because they expect the government to swoop in and save them?

For some that's true. Others think that unless they look out for themselves, nobody else will do it for them, and do not even expect to ever be able to collect Social Security. In other words, I think today's youth are divided into two camps: Those who expect a socio-economic apocalypse within the next two decades, and those who don't.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
I think a being capable of creating the universe from nothing is quite capable of existing independent of whether such pathetic creatures as ourselves choose to believe in said being. This debate is not very interesting to me for the simple reason that humans cannot under any reasonable philosophical model cause an eternal, omnipotent and omnipresent being to be "dead" any more than they can cause it to be "alive".

Oberon and Fmw, good points by the way.

I think you're looking at this backwards. We create our on symbols for how we understand the world. So it is us that exist, and by our own subconscious platform, we extend our knowledge further in a way that emulates creation. This subconscious platform is considered to be the throne of God for many, as our mental hands reach out and name all of creation from it.
 

ragashree

Reason vs Being
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
1,770
MBTI Type
Mine
Enneagram
1w9
I think you're looking at this backwards. We create our on symbols for how we understand the world. So it is us that exist, and by our own subconscious platform, we extend our knowledge further in a way that emulates creation. This subconscious platform is considered to be the throne of God for many, as our mental hands reach out and name all of creation from it.

No, YOU'RE looking at it backwards, in choosing to regard the concept of the divine as purely a human construct, which means you've already arrived at your conclusion before you even begin to examine the question.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
No, YOU'RE looking at it backwards, in choosing to regard the concept of the divine as purely a human construct, which means you've already arrived at your conclusion before you even begin to examine the question.

DerpDurrDog.jpg
 
O

Oberon

Guest
I kind of hate to point this out, but ragashree and I seemed to have arrived at the same conclusion... see my previous post.
 
Top