Tenants of Logical Pantheism

These tenants are still being worked out, but the following suppositions should serve as a starting point:

1. God = the sum of all energy in the universe.

Traditional pantheism associates God with the forces of Nature, Literally, it sees God in all things. The traditional Judaic/Christian/Muslim definition of God holds that God is omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient. By defining God in mathematical/physical terms, Logical Pantheists feel they have satisfied both Pantheist and the Judaic/Christian/Muslim definitions, as well as the need of science for a verifiable mathematical formulation of the concept.

Since God is the sum of all energy in the universe, God is, from this definition, omnipotent. Since energy is everywhere present in the universe (at least in the form of cosmic background radiation), it follows that from this definition, God is omnipresent. Since knowledge exists either in the form of matter (e.g. books, films, etc.) or energy (e.g. computer memory, human memory, etc.), and since matter is a form of energy (from E = MC^2) it follows that the sum of all energy includes all all knowledge, and thus from the Logical Pantheist definition God is omniscient.

If someone is struck by lightning, the electrical discharge can be explained as the result of sum of the electrical forces in the area. Thus a logical Pantheist can maintain with verifiable scientific accuracy, based on the definition of God as the sum of all energy, that the victim was struck by God.

2. Myth is the software of the neural network.

The gods (e.g. Aten, Jehova, Allah, Zeus, et al., as distinct from the general concept of GOD) can also be defined in purely mathematical terms: if artificial intelligence (AI) is analogous to human intelligence, then the gods are analogous to software routines running in the minds of believers. Thus the gods are no more "imaginary" than computer software is imaginary. Further, their existence as neural-software alone makes them immeasurably powerful and most certainly to feared: It was a version of the Allah myth running as neural-software in the minds of believers which struck down the World Trade Towers.

Scientists may feel their beliefs rise above the level of myth. One of the earliest successful sciences was Ptolemy's astronomy, which was able to predict eclipses based on a geocentric theory of the solar system. It required belief in epicycles to account for the orbit of the moon and make its eclipse predictions. When the heliocentric theory was espoused by Gallieo, et al., it proved superior because it didn't require belief in epicycles, and it provided a simplified explanation of planetary motion. Thus the geocentric theory which was the basis of Ptolemy's astronomical science was shown to be a myth.

Newtonian psysics seemed to represent truth, until Einstein's theory revealed that it too was just a myth. Eventually scientists expect a unified field theory will arise that reduces Einstein's theory to a myth. And so it can be seen that science progresses by revising the myths that allow it to function. Thus it appears that even science advances by moving from one myth to another, and myth is the only form of knowledge possible.

3. A belief system is to a human as an operating system is to a computer.

It is not meaningful to ask if Windows or a Mac OS, or Linux is "true." It is more meaningful to ask if it useful. Similarly beliefs in Christ, Krishna, Buddha, Zeus, Anubis et al. can be judged by their utility. The question of whether one belief system or another is "true," is beside the point. The important issue is how well the operating system functions for the computer user, or how well well the belief system functions for the believer.

Just as one might choose an operating system, or have it chosen for you, so too with belief systems. Some people are more comfortable using one operating system over all others, (often becuse it was the first they've learned) so too with belief systems.

4. Truth is absolute, but any statement of truth can only be made relative to the viewpoint of the observer.

This tenant can be explained by considering a card which is black on one side and white on the other. Observer A sees the dark side and concludes the card is black. Observer B sees the light side and concludes the card is white. Observer C sees both sides, and concludes the card is both black and white, All observers were correct in their observations, but the "truth" they see is relative to their viewpoint. Similarly, because we can only view truth from the viewpoint of different cultures, any observation of truth is relative to the culture we view it from; thus a god may look black in one culture, white in another, yet all views may be accurate based on the cultural viewpoints of the observers.

5. The resurrection of the dead began in April of 1985.

It was reported in the NY Science Times on 4/16/1985, when genetic engineers claimed that they had resurrected the DNA of an ancient Egyptian mummy. Although they resurrected the DNA they did not reactivate it, which would raise the question of whether they had resurrected the mummy itself. Subsequently it has theoretically become possible to clone human DNA, Thus it is also theoretically possible to clone that ancient DNA, Thus we are now able to apply science to the question of whether it is possible to raise the dead, and resurrection becomes a verifiable, i.e. scientific question as well as a metaphysical one. The possibility of genetically engineered resurrection is the central question of "Modern Metaphysics"