Created - Renewed
2012/03/27 - 2015/03/20
 


SUSTAINABILITY IMPERATIVE



There are such pages on the site:

* HOMEPAGE
* CHANGE THE MIND!
* UNITE MINDS!
* THINK of OTHERS!
* SUSTAINABI-
LITY CHALLENGE
* DEMO-IMPERATIVE
* ECO-IMPERATIVE
* ETHIC IMPERATIVE
* PLANETARY RESPONSIBILITY
* INDIVIDUAL SURVIVAL
* INFO-PAGE
*More significant materials of the site:

Opening a path to sustainable development
Panoramic thinking as a concept
Shortage of panoramic thinking: signs seen everywhere
Creating a system of civilization security
Civilization Security division at the UN has to be
Bankruptcy of intelligent people in civilization process
Civilization omissions to be found and filled in
Nature's recommendations for international institutions
New dimension of human rights
Universal Declaration of Human Planetary Responsibility
Humankind must have been fooled
Coauthoring with Voltaire
Secret of humor from depth of the evolution
Evolutionary classification of John Warfield's mindbugs

 

 

 

Coauthoring with Voltaire

Essay by Dr. Vladimir Tretyakov

“Si dieu n’existait pas, il faudrait l’inventer.”

I am going to proceed this thought ascribed to Voltaire, for it to sound so:

IF THE GOD WOULD NOT EXIST HE SHOULD BE INVENTED. AND JUST THIS HAD BEEN DONE.

So I want to give new, the firstly said out argument proving the god is a human invention. Follow my considerations.

All collective animals, the human not exception, are uniting with each other led by common structure-forming principle named HIERARCHIC ARCHETYPE. Family, group, collective, gang, factory, firm, NGO, TNC, state structure, state government, international organizations – everywhere there are any hierarch and his (rarely her) sub-hierarchs. Let us remark, to be subordinate is more easily than to be a dominant figure, even if because of you need not necessity to FIGHT for domination. I want to say that any hierarchic structure is ESTABLISHED by a dominant figure and MAINTAINED by mass of sub-dominant ones. We may see in it a pledge of this archetype’s viability.

Let’s go on. I think the main systems archetype of human beings’ actions is that in the systems theory named PATCHING THE HOLES. It had been formed in result of the evolution and had been called for further: really, for any individual to find/to obtain what is absent or to rid from what is undesirable/dangerous – all of that actions were quite alike ad hoc patching the holes.

Having an idea about psychological defense we may understand what meant feelings of self security at those hard and dangerous conditions (having begot idols, totems, prejudices, tokens, different gods – of sun, of water, of fire, of earth, of hunt, etc.). The next creative act had demanded any single god, very mighty, and he was invented together with prayers, those direct appeals to Highest Governor about help omitting shamans and sorcerers. This invention might be done then only when people had felt their belonging to all people as any human community and saw that they had over them nobody. The Highest Governor got that “scrap” to “patch” the “holed” hierarchic archetype. And hierarchic structure with lacking the Main Hierarch was replenished by him. In such the way occurred use of the customary method of “patching the holes”.

I ask believers’ pardon for unwilling blasphemy. Merely “patching the holes” metaphor is guilty having demanded “scraps”.

Remark: As each community wanted to have its own single god, some “single gods” appeared. In result, by 3rd millennium interesting situation has arisen.

Really, let we have n basic single gods and the same number of religions, even of them having Nk believers (k is 1 to n). Then, let B = N1 + N2 + … +Nn be total sum of all believers. Let us name AF total sum of all alien-faith believers. Then

AF = (B – N1) + (B – N2) + … + (B – Nk) =
n*B – B = (n – 1)*B.

Considering number of the main religions n = 6, we have got paradoxical conclusion: truly believers make up only 1/5 part of untruly believers! If to take into account that there are also believing no god is existing (i.e. atheists) then even less than 1/5. Is not there a reason to think that in such the way religions alienated people and especially peoples?

April 1, 2010 Supplement

There is a sensational news presented by «Izvestia» newspaper scientific portal www.inauka.ru where it was claimed «Humans possess of the inherent faith in God», with the link to «The Knowledge is the Power» magazine. It is about researches having carried out by Prof. Bruce Hood and his Bristol university team. They pretend to prove:

*modern humans are born with the faith in God;
*without the faith in God neither Homo Sapiens nor the modern might appear.

I may consider those conclusions as a confirmation of my thesis about the human-begot god, moreover even, God as it appears SHOULD BE INVENTED necessarily.

Though, I do not exclude, from believers’ point of view, inherent religious sense, on the contrary, may and should treat as confirmation of God’s existence, of his multiple APPEARANCE before them.

There is another paragraph of the digest:

*In during of centuries, the greatest world theologists and philosophers tried to prove or disprove God’s existence. However the usual logics appeared powerless to answer this question, which had been claimed as irrational by the modern science.

Thus, my arguments about hand-made God being not refuted may be of big interests as begot by any quite rational considerations – theoretically systems and socially psychological ones.

Some questions for discussion

Q1. Do you consider the evidence presented convictive?

Q2. If the religious feeling is really inherent, whether it confirms or refutes a god’s existence?

Q3. Taking into account clash of civilization going on, former religious wars, human-dividing argument given, might you, in spite of Voltaire, recognize that religions were, are and possibly will be rather evil than good for humanity?

See the essay at PhilosophyForum.com replied by a Professor Mars Man, Japan (supposedly under nickname):

I see a number of well-pointed out points, and it's all interesting, but as for the 'pro' side here (if I may, in fact, call it as such), I cannot help but get the sense of that ole 'survival instinct' at work. Purpose? Meaning? Most surely, the proof of the pudding is in the eating; life is simply a process among any number of processes, which proceeds. There is no outstanding observation to lead us to conclude that this particular process is of any greater value than other processes, and even less so, that there is any intelligent center at work behind it all.

As for religion, in its broadest sense, being something which can be disproved, I would strongly argue that such is terribly missing the point of that broadest meaning. Theist religious belief-systems? Yes, they can be, and (as mentioned) have been shown to be false. (along with the god-models they have offered)

Lawrence Turner's reply on Oct 17, 2010:

The idea of God has never been a problem for mankind. The problem lies in the need to conform a group of people to the same dogmatic understanding of God. The existence of God can not be proved or disproved but any scientist worth his weight in salt will confirm that the universe is becoming more complex. With that in mind I give as my example LIFE.

Physicists believe that several stellar collisions are required to form the heaviest elements and that all LIFE originated as stardust. Existence is composed of elementary particles that wink in and out of existence perpetually.

Perhaps there is no such a thing as man has conceived of God, especially in man's image, yet that does not preclude the existence of something man has not, as yet, been able to describe accurately. ...

The author response on Oct 19, 2010:

"The idea of God has never been a problem for mankind."

It appears me the assertion has no confirmation. Really, when gods had been everywhere (of Sun, Moon, Fire, Hunting, Water, Fertility, etc.) there was a problem which is the most important; when world religion appeared, problem was which One-Single was (and is till now!) the very veritable. Moreover, the more humankind is realizing itself as entity, the keener is the problem what to do and to make for inter-ethnic pacification of humankind.

"The problem lies in the need to conform a group of people to the same dogmatic understanding of God."

I think the need to conform their groups of people is not for whole humankind but rather for clergymen and fathers of the churches preoccupied to save and replenish their congregations and parishes.

"The existence of God can not be proved or disproved…"

Lawrence, does it mean you consider my evidence is none evidence at all? If so, I would like to ask you about pointing out those “weak places” what permit you to do such the general inference as if annihilating my systemically theoretical attempt to prove physical absence of God. Without your arguments, it is not convincing.

Ad hoc Heinrich Heine's dictum:

"In dark times people had been governed at best with help of religion because in full dark a blind is a better guide as distinguishing a road and paths better than a sighted. However it is in truth stupidly still to use old blinds as guides when the day comes".

Still more ad hoc maybe is the dictum by Stanislaw Jerzy Lec, the Polish thinker:

"Czasem mnie diabel kusi, by uwierzyc w Boga".

It means: "Sometimes a devil tempts me to believe in God".

You may see unrolling of this subject: Stanislaw Lec: Far not all have resisted

Religious People Are Less Intelligent Than Atheists, Concludes New Study

By Sara C Nelson
(Huffington Post UK, 2013/08/06)

A review of 63 scientific studies dating back to 1928 has concluded that religious people are less intelligent than non-believers. Only 10 of the 63 studies showed a positive correlation between intelligence and religiosity.

This research was fulfilled by Prof. Miron Zuckerman (University of Rochester) and published in the academic journal Personality and Social Psychology Review on 6 August, 2013. Intelligence was defined there as the “ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience.” The inference was that “religious beliefs are irrational, not anchored in science, not testable, and therefore unappealing to intelligent people.”

Ad hoc that was Russian writer Anton Tchekhov who said once:
“I look with surprise at every believing intelligent one”.

If not my essay then Anton Chekhov dictum might be of interest for Positive Atheism resource as among their quotes, there is not this Chechov thought.

 


 

   
Copyright © IntelTech»—V.N.Tretyakov (U.M.Tratsiakou). The present information is intellectual property of the author's site, who would be interested in knowing any usage of his materials. [email protected]