Submitted by BernardJOrtcutt t3_107f3ud in philosophy
OMKensey t1_j3t82t6 wrote
Reply to comment by TheRealBeaker420 in /r/philosophy Open Discussion Thread | January 09, 2023 by BernardJOrtcutt
I agree with your entire post. A complete lack of sensory organs makes me question whether this conscious density would even know anything as you point out. And, most certainly, what it is like to be this density (its consciousness) would be nothing like ours. I'm not even sure it would have any higher order consciousness because there is not a brain network - - everything might be too dense for pathways.
I also don't think any current relationship with humans other than parts of it literally became us. But just miniscule parts.
On the other hand, it is all of the universe's consciousness condensed into a tiny point. That seems... interesting. But as you say it raises more questions than answers.
I also tend to think this probably wouldn't qualify as a god under most definitions, but I did want others' opinions.
It's a strange place for me to be: "Hi I'm atheist but I do give pretty high credence to this weird thing at the beginning of the universe."
TheRealBeaker420 t1_j3tduhw wrote
Maybe a bit, but atheists come in all flavors, and can even be religious or spiritual. Other times it's basically just shorthand for being a religious skeptic. I even heard a pantheist claim to be an atheist once, which tbh felt a bit over the top. It's a pretty flexible term, though. I think either pantheism or deism are the appropriate terms for what you're describing, if you want to call it a god. If you don't then I wouldn't overcomplicate it.
OMKensey t1_j3tjgg9 wrote
Thanks so much. That is actually very helpful.
TheRealBeaker420 t1_j3tkw3y wrote
No problem :)
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments