God is a feeling
God is a feeling that has emerged through time since humans have inhabited this earth. Religion cultivates it, science de-cultivates it.
A wave is a feeling. A wave does not "exist" in and of itself, but it is an emergent property of particles in motion. Electric fields, magnetic fields, and other vector fields do not "exist", but they do come to fruition thanks to the smaller particles and properties underlying them.
So too does God (god) come to fruition thanks to the smaller particles and properties underlying him/her/it. We are the smaller particles and life provides the properties.
Debating god's existence is as fruitful as debating the existence of a vector field. The more I learn, the less certain I am of all the knowledge and experience that underpin me, given my particular environment, at this particular time on earth, in this particular culture, with this particular set of numbing and overloading yet sometimes exhilarating and provoking stimuli that I'm faced with day in and out.
Just as I would laugh at religion's attempt to disprove the "existence" of a vector field, I laugh at science's attempt to disprove god. It's so utterly stupid, and I've read and heard arguments on both sides of the question. As soon as religion cultivates a feeling and vocabulary and way of knowing (epistemology) regarding physics I will begin to entertain their arguments for or against the existence of vector fields. As soon as science cultivates a feeling and vocabulary and way of knowing (epistemology) regarding religion I will begin to entertain their arguments for or against the existence of god.
The more I learn, the more I am convinced that much of epistemology is based on a set of feelings. When I study science for a long enough time, I don't feel god. When I study god by living life and the smaller particles and properties underlying him/her/it, I don't feel vector fields---rather, I feel what emerges from them. When I study both domains at the same time, alternating between the two, I don't know what to feel...or maybe I feel everything, which is maybe the point.
A wave is a feeling. A wave does not "exist" in and of itself, but it is an emergent property of particles in motion. Electric fields, magnetic fields, and other vector fields do not "exist", but they do come to fruition thanks to the smaller particles and properties underlying them.
So too does God (god) come to fruition thanks to the smaller particles and properties underlying him/her/it. We are the smaller particles and life provides the properties.
Debating god's existence is as fruitful as debating the existence of a vector field. The more I learn, the less certain I am of all the knowledge and experience that underpin me, given my particular environment, at this particular time on earth, in this particular culture, with this particular set of numbing and overloading yet sometimes exhilarating and provoking stimuli that I'm faced with day in and out.
Just as I would laugh at religion's attempt to disprove the "existence" of a vector field, I laugh at science's attempt to disprove god. It's so utterly stupid, and I've read and heard arguments on both sides of the question. As soon as religion cultivates a feeling and vocabulary and way of knowing (epistemology) regarding physics I will begin to entertain their arguments for or against the existence of vector fields. As soon as science cultivates a feeling and vocabulary and way of knowing (epistemology) regarding religion I will begin to entertain their arguments for or against the existence of god.
The more I learn, the more I am convinced that much of epistemology is based on a set of feelings. When I study science for a long enough time, I don't feel god. When I study god by living life and the smaller particles and properties underlying him/her/it, I don't feel vector fields---rather, I feel what emerges from them. When I study both domains at the same time, alternating between the two, I don't know what to feel...or maybe I feel everything, which is maybe the point.