Einstein and the Cosmic Man

[seeds]

However, it's amazing that you cannot see the irony in your proposal in conjunction with your atheistic stance.

That's because I am not an atheist, and have not been so for over a decade now.

I’m sorry, Greta, I didn’t mean to state something false about you. I’m just going by what I have inferred from your postings.

Was it God in my peak experiences or just brain chemicals, or is that essentially the same thing, or was it something else again? Maybe, as you mentioned, a previous Omega Point (or not)? I don't believe, I don't disbelieve. I simply don't know.

Well, if you can be open to the highly speculative possibility that a living “Omega Point” entity (an entity that emerged from an infinitely older “ancestral” universe) could be the living (and conscious) foundation of this universe...

...then at the very least, it represents a “foot in the door,” so to speak, towards you moving past the insulting sense of incredulousness you experience every time you hear the word “God,” wherein the absurd image of an oversized humanoid “male” immediately springs to mind.

Now I’m not saying that you have to believe that such a thing actually exists; I’m just suggesting that when I, in particular, am discussing the idea of “God” with you, that you attempt to envision the “Omega Point” entity, and not the silly imagery painted on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

My personal visualization of what God might look like can be seen in the following thought experiment.

Close your eyes and create a giant mirror before the eye of your mind.

Imagine its resolution and seemingly “realness” as being at the level you experience during a vivid dream.

Now assuming that that mentally produced mirror could literally reflect an image back at you, looking into it, what do you suppose you would see?

I believe that if you could actually see the image of your inner being (the “eye” of your mind) reflecting back at you, you would in essence be seeing a “familial-like” replication of whatever it is that God looks like.
_______

[seeds]

The god idea can be a lot of use as inspiration for making the world a better place, only if god is freed from metaphysical existence, and becomes what I said, an "inspiration". A sort of moving symbol.

The “god idea” in my theology is a representation of the fully-fruitioned adult version of that which we are the “seeds” of, as is depicted in the following illustration...



(As always, for a clearer view of the dialogue, click on the following link and expand the image - http://www.theultimateseeds.com/Images/ ... %20God.jpg)

Again, Belinda, I’m not asking you to believe any of this, I am merely offering some speculative possibilities.

(By the way, I think that the illustration above kind of fits in with Greta's (make that Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's) “Omega point” concept, as long as she is open to the idea of the existence of “ancestral” universes.)
_______

I don't usually sidestep challenging questions but in the case of your question about evidence for God, it doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense because the higher Being or being that you propose is by definition other than us that's to say it's supernatural.

Yes indeed, Super-“Natural” - as is clearly stated in the title of the illustration.

You want evidence for the existence of God, then as “Madge” the dish soap lady says:

But what we take to be evidence depends upon natural senses. I am not denying that you or anybody else has had or might have paranormal experiences. I am disputing the status of those experiences.

You are taking kind of an odd approach to the situation, because the main complaint of most skeptics regarding these sorts of issues is grounded in the lack of evidence.

In other words, skeptics demand evidence for the existence of God, yet here you are insisting that all evidence is inaccessible.

You’re a cruel mistress, Belinda

I am sure that your ideas are adult in the sense of not childish ideas about God having a face and so on. Ideas about God as ultimate authority for how to live one's life, and what we believe exists, are childish in the sense that such believers cannot cut loose from a state of super-being that is 'better', 'higher', than human being. Such believers remind me of people in Britain who think that rule of law would crumple up and die if the monarch had to live in a council house.

And I am sure you agree that whereas Elizabeth II is an excellent queen, there have been some horrible kings and queens, emperors, and popes. Likewise, your super-being is not guaranteed to be good.

Actually, Belinda, I have nothing but contempt, not for individuals such as Elizabeth herself, but for the institutionalized division of wealth and power where, through the lottery of birth, some are consigned to a life of luxury and an unwarranted sense of privilege, while others are consigned to a life of poverty and misery.

And in regards to this comment...

Likewise, your super-being is not guaranteed to be good.

...it is utter nonsense to put my so-called “super-being” in the same category as human kings, queens, emperors, and popes.

Like most others, I'd be delighted to experience reunion with dead loved ones, including my dogs. After my own death of course, as I'd not want any of them to be dragged back to this world of suffering! Improbable in any case.

Sorry, B, but I don’t think our earthly pets (or anything else below that of the human level of consciousness) can survive the process of physical death.

I would explain why, but I doubt that you are interested in such speculation.
_______

[Nick_A]

Most posting on this thread are believers in inductive logic for appreciating the potentials for the human condition. Einstein provides an alternative view which will be rejected since it asserts a higher form of reason than inductive logic that is essential for human progress. Of course it goes over like a lead balloon.

1930
"Many people think that the progress of the human race is based on experiences of an empirical, critical nature, but I say that true knowledge is to be had only through a philosophy of deduction. For it is intuition that improves the world, not just following the trodden path of thought. Intuition makes us look at unrelated facts and then think about them until they can all be brought under one law. To look for related facts means holding onto what one has instead of searching for new facts. Intuition is the father of new knowledge, while empiricism is nothing but an accumulation of old knowledge. Intuition, not intellect, is the ‘open sesame’ of yourself." -- Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 16.), conversation March 4, 1930

The cosmic man will be capable of the philosophy of deduction and it will be considered insulting to the dominant dualism governing secularism and its belief in the scientific method leading to true knowledge

Nietzsche said “God is dead.” It has been replaced by egoism and the Great Beast. But now the Beast is consuming itself in the belief that technology is the path leading to the inner perception of human meaning and purpose the human heart is called to. So the Beast is dying. When it dies will we hit bottom? Will the cycle begin again for those remaining alive because of of opening to deductive logic? Who knows? I do know the death of the Beast will not be pleasant

"Be proud of being the mean between macrocosm and microcosm. Stand still and marvel. Try not to become a man of success, but a man of value. Look around at how people want to get more than he receives. Be creative, but make sure that what you create is not a curse for mankind.” Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 143.)

Macrocosmic man is of course cosmic man while microcosmic man is cave man. The Great Beast will not permit its subjects consciously evolving so only a few will consciously evolve in the direction of macrocosmic man. Cave man as a whole will continue to adapt to changing external influences and call it evolution.

[Greta]

1930

"Many people think that the progress of the human race is based on experiences of an empirical, critical nature, but I say that true knowledge is to be had only through a philosophy of deduction. For it is intuition that improves the world, not just following the trodden path of thought.

Yes. If there are no creatives, what will the builders build? Then again, if there are no builders, what of substance will the creatives create?

[Belinda]

Seeds wrote:

Actually, Belinda, I have nothing but contempt, not for individuals such as Elizabeth herself, but for the institutionalized division of wealth and power where, through the lottery of birth, some are consigned to a life of luxury and an unwarranted sense of privilege, while others are consigned to a life of poverty and misery

Same here! Please consider how Christianity has been manipulated by the wealthy to support and perpetuate these very divisions. Islam and Judaism too have been used by the wealthy powerful people for their own benefit.'Hinduism' has been politicised in India. Now we see how in Myanmar even Buddhism has been used to support rulers who have consigned an entire poorer section of the society(Muslims) to poverty and misery.

Buddha rejected kingship. By contrast Christianity is riddled with kingship metaphors and even military metaphors. Islam, Judaism, and Christianity could not have arisen had it not been that kings were already long-established as the traditional sort of regime.

Regarding evidence for God, evidence is used in common sense, courts of law, and science, in other words evidence is useful for worldly matters. Evidence does not and cannot apply to other-worldly God. God's existence is a matter of faith.

[Nick_A]

Belinda wrote:

Regarding evidence for God, evidence is used in common sense, courts of law, and science, in other words evidence is useful for worldly matters. Evidence does not and cannot apply to other-worldly God. God's existence is a matter of faith.

Evidence for a seeker of truth and one who is opening to a universal as opposed to a limited cave perspective, is experienced by means of the unique quality of religious emotion as distinct from animal and negative emotions. The developing cosmic man will have experienced universal order as a cosmic religious emotion in the context of the chaotic human condition as it exists within them. The cosmic person is a humble person by definition. Personal experience is the greatest form of evidence. Einstein explains:

The development from a religion of fear to a moral religion is a great step in peoples lives. And yet, that primitive religions are based purely on fear and the religions of civilized peoples purely on morality is a prejudice against which we must be on guard. the truth is that all religions are a varying blend of both types, with this differentiation: that on the higher levels of social life the religion of morality predominates.

Common to all types is the anthropomorphic character of their conception of God. In general, only individuals of exceptional endowments, and exceptionally high-minded communities, rise to any considerable extent above this level. But there is a third stage of religious experience which belongs to all of them, even though it is rarely found in a pure form: I shall call it cosmic religious feeling. It is very difficult to elucidate this feeling to anyone who is entirely without it, especially as there is no anthropomorphic conception of God corresponding to it.

The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he want to experience the universe as a single significant whole. The beginnings of cosmic religious feeling already appear at an early stage of development, e.g., in many of the Psalms of David and in some of the Prophets. Buddhism, as we have learned especially from the wonderful writings of Schopenhauer, contains a much stronger element of this.

The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious feeling, which knows no dogma and no God conceived in man's image; so that there can be no church whose central teachings are based on it. Hence it is precisely among the heretics of every age that we find men who were filled with this highest kind of religious feeling and were in many cases regarded by their contemporaries as atheists, sometimes also as saints. Looked at in this light, men like Democritus, Francis of Assisi, and Spinoza are closely akin to one another.

How can cosmic religious feeling be communicated from one person to another, if it can give rise to no definite notion of a God and no theology? In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive in those who are receptive to it.

Excerpted from -- Albert Einstein, Science and Religion, NY Times, November 9, 1930

[Greta]

Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he want to experience the universe as a single significant whole.

Frustration with subjectivity?

[Belinda]

Nick_A wrote:

Evidence for a seeker of truth and one who is opening to a universal as opposed to a limited cave perspective, is experienced by means of the unique quality of religious emotion as distinct from animal and negative emotions. The developing cosmic man will have experienced universal order as a cosmic religious emotion in the context of the chaotic human condition as it exists within them. The cosmic person is a humble person by definition. Personal experience is the greatest form of evidence.

"the unique quality of religious emotion as distinct from animal and negative emotions"is what the sceptic queries.

How can you, Nick, tell the difference between religious emotion and "animal and negative emotion" ? I offer some suggestions below.

The religious emotion arises in you on religious occasions such as being in a grand cathedral, or hearing religious music.

The religious emotion causes you to be kind to other people.

The religious emotion causes you to be more courageous.

The religious emotion causes you to feel a welcomed and worthy part of a group of similar believers towards which you feel loyal.

[seeds]

Regarding evidence for God, evidence is used in common sense, courts of law, and science, in other words evidence is useful for worldly matters. Evidence does not and cannot apply to other-worldly God. God's existence is a matter of faith.

Now I realize that the following form of speculative (“supernatural”) thinking is not your “cup o’ tea,” however, I suggest that the lack of evidence or, better yet, the “withholding” of the evidence of God’s existence is the veritable “linchpin” that keeps the illusion of objective reality intact.

As I have stated, over and over again in this forum, I believe that irrefutable evidence (as in proof) of the existence of God and that of a pending higher context of existence for us, would result in consequences that the skeptics simply have not considered.

And to understand what I am getting at, please allow me to present a fanciful little thought experiment of which I have titled - “The Trans-dimensional Sliding Glass Patio Door”...



Imagine that there existed a sliding-glass patio door, through-which we could literally see our departed friends and loved ones, still alive and existing in a wondrous new form and setting, summoning us to join them (something that would represent clear and irrefutable evidence of the existence of “heaven,” so to speak).

Furthermore, imagine that all you had to do was to open the glass door and step across the threshold...

(a euphemistic description of a quick and painless death)

...and your soul (or whatever our ultimate form truly is) would thus enter into a transcendent context of reality that would make our present context seem like hell in comparison.

What do you honestly think humans would do if indeed there were no negative judgments or condemnations for doing so?

Make no mistake about it, Belinda, the piling up of bodies on “this side” of the door would require a constant removal until every last human on earth (all 7 billion+ of us) had stepped across the threshold.

Now, imagine that the knowledge of this trans-dimensional door (again, irrefutable evidence of our ultimate and eternal destiny) had existed 5 thousand years ago.

Do I really need to explain what the consequences would be as it pertains to you and I and the aforementioned 7 billion+?*

*(Just in case there are those who cannot extrapolate the meaning of my point, the consequences would be that all 7 billion+ humans presently alive on this planet would never have come into existence, because all human reproduction on earth would have ceased - 5 thousand years ago.)

Belinda, if it is indeed a possibility that a wondrous eternal destiny awaits us following the death of our bodies, then can you not understand the need for secrecy in the matter?
_______

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

If heaven is real, then why the hell do we need this shithole in the first place?

_______

[Nick_A]

If heaven is real, then why the hell do we need this shithole in the first place?

_______

Trix, why pick on poor mother earth in this way? Is it really a shithole or are we responsible for messing up her home? Maybe the real question is why mother earth needs humanity to destroy her creation.

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

If heaven is real, then why the hell do we need this shithole in the first place?

_______

Trix, why pick on poor mother earth in this way? Is it really a shithole or are we responsible for messing up her home? Maybe the real question is why mother earth needs humanity to destroy her creation.

Dude. Lions eat deer alive before humans even dumped 1000 bottles of trash into the ocean. This world sucks.

[Greta]

1930

"Many people think that the progress of the human race is based on experiences of an empirical, critical nature, but I say that true knowledge is to be had only through a philosophy of deduction. For it is intuition that improves the world, not just following the trodden path of thought.

Yes. If there are no creatives, what will the builders build? Then again, if there are no builders, what of substance will the creatives create?

Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he want to experience the universe as a single significant whole.

Frustration with subjectivity?

Are inconvenient questions inevitably ignored?

[Nick_A]

Nick_A wrote:

Evidence for a seeker of truth and one who is opening to a universal as opposed to a limited cave perspective, is experienced by means of the unique quality of religious emotion as distinct from animal and negative emotions. The developing cosmic man will have experienced universal order as a cosmic religious emotion in the context of the chaotic human condition as it exists within them. The cosmic person is a humble person by definition. Personal experience is the greatest form of evidence.

"the unique quality of religious emotion as distinct from animal and negative emotions"is what the sceptic queries.

How can you, Nick, tell the difference between religious emotion and "animal and negative emotion" ? I offer some suggestions below.

The religious emotion arises in you on religious occasions such as being in a grand cathedral, or hearing religious music.

The religious emotion causes you to be kind to other people.

The religious emotion causes you to be more courageous.

The religious emotion causes you to feel a welcomed and worthy part of a group of similar believers towards which you feel loyal.

You are describing expressions of earthly emotions. Religious emotions in contrast are experienced when consciously experience the connection between above and below or levels of reality. That is why these feelings are considered sacred. The current issue of Parabola deals with this connection from different perspectives. For those interested in the question of the sacred it is an issue well worth reading.

https://parabola.org/current-issue/

Of course secularism must deny the reality of the sacred since it threatens its dominance. That is why the subject of human education is so difficult snce it is more than teaching skills but must provide the conditions which inspire awakening. It is rejected by secular progressive education As Einstein wrote:

How can cosmic religious feeling be communicated from one person to another, if it can give rise to no definite notion of a God and no theology? In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive in those who are receptive to it.

Also consider

“The greatest responsibility of all: the transmission of the mystery.”
—Basarab Nicolescu

It is the greatest responsiblity and the Great Beast opposes it in defense of its beliefs. Real human teachers and those who need them are at a severe disadvantage in these times when enchantment with technology rules the day. I know we are doomed but it is nice to know that a person can go down with the ship knowing there have been and still exist these rare people who have offered such awakening influences for the good of humanity..

[Nick_A]

1930

"Many people think that the progress of the human race is based on experiences of an empirical, critical nature, but I say that true knowledge is to be had only through a philosophy of deduction. For it is intuition that improves the world, not just following the trodden path of thought.

Yes. If there are no creatives, what will the builders build? Then again, if there are no builders, what of substance will the creatives create?

Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he want to experience the universe as a single significant whole.

Frustration with subjectivity?

Are inconvenient questions inevitably ignored?

When our subjectivity doesn't offer the experience of meaning needed by the depth of the heart it is more than frustrating. It can even lead to both psychological and physical suicide. The feeling is of being in a prison and the intellect only offers a larger prison. How can we get out of our own way long enough to become open to the knowledge our subjectivity prevents?