Subject: Re: Humanist/Pantheist Art Project
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003
From: Flash Light
To: Chicschiss@aol.com

Dr. Schissel:

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I believe you put the question well when you imply that it comes down to whether, "There is a difference between the reality of a god, and the reality of the concept of a god."

I suggest that in the case of gods, unlike the case with humans, the difference between said concept and said reality is inconsequential. In the case of a human said reality requires a body of flesh and blood. In the case of a god, no such corporeal embodiment is required. The "concept of a god" in the neural operating systems of believers, for all practical predictive purposes, is the "god" for those believers. Said concept is the only manifestation of the deity necessary to understand the immeasurable power of that deity on His/Her/Its followers. Why should the deity need to have any other manifestation for us to consider He/She/It real? The realization that said difference between said concept and said reality can be ignored in the case of gods is, you are correct, a key to understanding logical pantheism.

Why should neural software be considered any less real than computer software? Yes, computer software is created by the efforts of men and women, but so too is neural software laboriously programmed into the neural network of the believer by his/her "religious training." True the neural software suggests but does not guarantee behavior, however Windows crashes all the time: no guarantee there either. Microsoft as well as religions can be described as using "deception and fear" to gain dominance, again no difference.

Finally you state "software is designed to do a specific job. . . belief systems are not software." Perhaps your only experience with software involves applications like word processors, however there exist software programs designed to simulate artificial intelligence, and guide robotic systems through hostile environments, and that's very similar to guiding a believer on a path through life. Thus the distinction you attempt to draw between neural vs. computer software breaks down at every salient point in your argument.

I am suggesting that the vision of truth which is most useful, and will serve us best, sees the gods existing as neural software, and attempts to deal with the real powers of the gods due to said existence. To dismiss the gods as "imaginary" or "untrue" obfuscates this reality, and seems a dangerous misestimation rather than a "useful truth."

Respectfully,

Flash