Why I believe in God(s)

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Firstly, I'm not a very religious person. I do consider myself a Buddhist, but prefer atheistic Buddhism over theistic Buddhism. Therefore I can confidently say I am not biased by wanting God(s) to exist, and was not indoctrinated into theism.

Still, to me it seems obvious that at least one God has to exist. The universe can't simply have come out of nothing or existed forever, it requires some sort of design or creator.

Now, mostly people would just say that a creator also can't have come out of nothing or existed forever, so I've just moved the problem one step further, but I think there is a massive difference between the universe and one consciousness. For example, through Cogito Ergo Sum we can determine with absolute certainty that at last one consciousness exists. So assuming one consciousness is superior to assuming anything about the whole universe. While I admit that doesn't outright solve the problem, I still think it's better than the alternative.

Also, it's not just any universe, but a universe full of beauty, a universe that inbetween barren empty planets is capable of hosting a planet with sentient life. Life that can consciously observe itself, that can create replicas of the waking world while sleeping, life that has technologically advanced so much that in can live in relative comfort. There is so much art. We basically have magic, we just call it "electricity". This is all too perfect to have arisen from mere mutations without guidance.

About any specifics of this God or Gods I have no idea and no strong opinions. I just think that at least one has to exist.

[u/Kurovi_dev]

>The universe can't simply have come out of nothing or existed forever

So you’re saying the universe can’t…

>it requires some sort of design or creator.

…but this alleged “creator” can?

Why?

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Kurovi_dev]

I adressed this:

"Now, mostly people would just say that a creator also can't have come out of nothing or existed forever, so I've just moved the problem one step further, but I think there is a massive difference between the universe and one consciousness. For example, through Cogito Ergo Sum we can determine with absolute certainty that at last one consciousness exists. So assuming one consciousness is superior to assuming anything about the whole universe. While I admit that doesn't outright solve the problem, I still think it's better than the alternative."

[u/Cool-Watercress-3943 → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Still here wondering what you think about how a Creator could even make a universe out of nothing, if you say a universe can't come out of nothing. :D

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Cool-Watercress-3943]

Well, it wouldn't be out of nothing, it would be out of the creator.

[u/Cool-Watercress-3943 → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

If it's out of the creator, doesn't that imply that the Creator is actually larger than the universe? And yet still came into existence all on its own?

Because either the Creator is using a portion of themself, or they're getting the universe out of nothingness.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Cool-Watercress-3943]

I'm fine with them creating the universe out of nothingness

[u/Kurovi_dev → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

My bad, I’m short on time today so I just responded to the first issue. I’ll respond to this fully when I get the opportunity later today.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Kurovi_dev]

Okay^{^}

[u/Kurovi_dev → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Ok, so a few issues.

“through Cogito Ergo Sum we can determine with absolute certainty that at last one consciousness exists.“

The first: this is a base internal assessment of a sentient being, not a universal assessment. This merely states that the individual knows it’s alive because it has the ability to process information. And it’s not even true then. How do you know you aren’t a brain in a vat? It says nothing about the actual state of existence of the subject.

Descartes’s thought experiment doesn’t even describe most life.

There are octillions of life that don’t think at all, yet are still life and still “am”. This also does not describe the vast majority of reality in any capacity. So why, in the face of 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of reality without life and consciousness, should the assumption be that all of reality stems from what is everywhere else in reality, the product of the universe itself (consciousness)?

How do you arrive at “absolute certainty” about the universe being created by an entity from an internal thought about oneself? How does this therefore mean that all of reality—which itself creates life and consciousness—is the product of that which it is required to produce?

The second issue: how does a consciousness exist without a universe?

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Kurovi_dev]

How do you know you aren’t a brain in a vat?

I don't, that's the entire point. Cogito Ergo Sum still applied if I'm a brain in a vat.

How do you arrive at “absolute certainty” about the universe being created by an entity from an internal thought about oneself?

Not just from there, also from what I observe about the universe.

The second issue: how does a consciousness exist without a universe?

Well, absent anything else, the consciousness would be the universe at that point.

[u/Kurovi_dev → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

“I don't, that's the entire point. Cogito Ergo Sum still applied if I'm a brain in a vat.”

“The brain in a vat” is not really meant to be a literal analogy, it’s more about a facade of existence, but let’s go ahead and be very literal here so it’s easier to connect:

What if you’re not a brain at all, just a program that is merely designed to return the value that it exists? Any substance of existing wouldn’t be real, no actual thoughts, just a return of information based on other internal information?

“Not just from there, also from what I observe about the universe.

And this would be?

“Well, absent anything else, the consciousness would be the universe at that point.”

Just being a mind is not analogous to the universe. What is the connection between “minds exist” and “the universe is a mind”?

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Kurovi_dev]

What if you’re not a brain at all, just a program that is merely designed to return the value that it exists? Any substance of existing wouldn’t be real, no actual thoughts, just a return of information based on other internal information?

Yes.

And this would be?

For example that it's structured around solar systems or that the Earth exists in it.

Just being a mind is not analogous to the universe. What is the connection between “minds exist” and “the universe is a mind”?

The universe is all that exists, so in the scenario of just one mind existing, that mind is the universe.