Athena

Okay, let us assume God is just our imagination. Why would anyone want to argue this point? Why would anyone care if God is only a figment of our imagination or something else? What does it matter? I love this argument. Now what difference does it make if we believe in oceans, mountains, or God, or not? Is it the same for an Eskimo to not be able to image the environment of southern California, as it is for us to not be able to image there is a God? If there is a difference, what is it?

Why do people who are sure God doesn't exist, enter discussions of God? Why do others discuss God?

I disagree with you, because the morality and process of democracy depends on having a notion of an unknown God, and understanding of the laws of nature. We must bring both together to have a strong democracy and to continue to lift man to his highest potential. By the way, a God who violates the laws of nature is a false God, and I object to the argument that the only God is a false one.

Oh yes, this is exactly what I believe, because when we think God, we are thinking what is possible, what is moral, how are we all connected? Things we might want to think about as we go about changing the world, and doing things that can not be undone. And along with,hat I think is an agreement with Devilsolution, our judgements are not purely based on facts. They are also based on how we feel about those facts. This feeling piece is what separates us from a logic machine, and, it is our capacity for logic that separates us from other animals. That means how what we believe, and therefore the pattern we set set for our emotional state of being, is important. Someone who habitually stimulates negativity thinking with a negative belief system, will make different decisions than someone who habitually stimulates positive thinking with a positive belief system. This is what makes the difference between a Bin Laden and a Gandhi. It matters if your God is a loving and forgiving God, or is a fearsome and punishing God, or if we reject any concept of God, because it is this root decision about God, sets our thinking habit, and our thinking habit, is determines how we will react to everything else. Not completely correct. The Greek gods and goddess are based in nature, and I believe this makes an important difference. The God of Abraham and Jesus mythology is not nature base but is heaven based, and can be angels or devils. I am not sure I am finding the right words to express this point? Each Greek god and goddess is a concept and an archetype. We can learn much about nature and especially human nature, by studying them. This is something totally different form the God of Abraham and Jesus, which are heaven beings, not earth beings. I don't think we should speak of heaven beings without mentioning they can also be devils, because this battle of spiritual beings of light and darkness, is detached from our earthly experience, that is the meaning of humans being fallen, there separation from God, and than these spiritual beings are imposed upon us, instead of being part of it. These spiritual beings can break the laws of nature, and can do either good or bad things to us. I am not aware of saying God is separate from the universe. I think I say God is the creative force and laws that are manifest as the universe. This idea of what exist in a non material way and really what is matter, and the relationship between the two, is surely worthy of our contemplation. I exist as energy and matter. The chair I sit on and my desk are both energy and matter. Can matter exist without energy, or can energy exist without matter? For me these are questions about God. It seems others have accused of me creating my own mythology of God. Dare you explain that mythology to me, because I must have Alzheimer's disease. I do not remember tell anyone, "this is what God is", other than saying God is the creative force and laws of the universe, and beyond our comprehension. That is not my own mythology. It actually comes from the evolution of Greek thought. Now I would be thrilled if the good minds here desired to discuss the evolution of Greek thought, and why I object to the God of Abraham religions, while insisting there is a God and we come to know this God through science and this is essential to democracy. Like I use the name Athena, because this subject is so important to me. I think I have been very clear about the importance of mythology. Darn I am out of time, but want to stress how extremely valuable these discussions have been to me. I want to sincerely thank all of you for pushing me to think about what think. Before I run off, I want to stress the important difference between a mythology based in nature and one that is not. Greek mythology is based in nature and brings us to science. The God of Abraham mythology is separated from its nature base, and is based on superstition not nature. Paradoxical isn't it. The followers of the religion that is based on superstition, believe they stand against superstition, and they killed the line of nature based god reasoning, that gave us science and democracy. Now my efforts to reawaken the Greek line of thinking that gave us science and democracy, often seems futile. This forum has been more intelligent and truer to the meaning and intent of freedom of speech than any other. Kudos to all of you.

The Peon's question and Chalky's answer motivated me to google CO2 and acidic oceans and I got this http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/07/the-acid-ocean-the-other-problem-with-cosub2sub-emission/ According to this site, our seas could be in serious trouble, because burning fossils fuels is releasing CO2 which is interacting with the seas, too fast. The mechanism that gets the ph at a desired level can not keep up with the rapid pace of CO2 making the seas too acid. So if the event that caused the dinosaurs to go extinct, involved sudden high levels of CO2, the seas would have become too acid too fast, and marine creatures could not adjust fast enough? However, 800,000 years ago the oceans were more acid than they are today. It is my understanding the problem would be the speed of the change. If things change slowly everything has time to adjust. If there is a sudden change, things don't have time to adjust.

Hot and cold water are as universal as good and evil, but I am not sure of a struggle? Is it the intention of cold water to force hot water to be cold? I am not sure of a universal concept of struggle between opposing forces? There is life and death, and surely living things do what they can to survive, but is death deliberately trying to steal their life? I think not. We can not prevent death, but we can maximize our health and live longer, and then how evil is death? Might death be an angel of misery? Is it unavoidable that we resist what is, instead of accept what is and go with the flow? I think not. I think there are cultural differences and that it might serve us well to be mindful of them. That is explore truth and be aware of possibilities, and our role in creating what is possible. Marat, a huge thank you! I was not aware of Manicheanism, and now learning of it I am so moved, and too excited to be comprehensive. I think I shall be a bit manic for awhile, dealing with the thoughts running through my head, as the Wikipedia explanation gives me insight into many other concepts. I will return when I process all this thinking. Ah yes, I think I will go sit in a hot tub and contemplate this awesome new revelation of knowledge. Things can not get much better than this. I might just explode with happiness.

What is it called when people nit pick over the meaning of words? This is a good thing because it forces us to think about the meaning of words and about what we think. Okay, I looked up the word supernatural and it has a pretty good meaning. "Not explainable by known natural forces or laws". This is a good explanation of God, up to the point of inventing false gods. So far this does not make God an unbelievable human like being. The problem comes when we humanize God, and add angels and demons, and add Satan who is the protagonist of this mythology. The problem is, this mythology is not based in nature, and I don't believe this is a good thing. Whereas, holding a concept of God as the creating and controlling of the universe, remains based in nature. So I will give in on the point that God is supernatural, and say this does not mean the God of Abraham or any other humanized God, ghost, angels, demons, Satan, or unicorns exist in reality. God exist, but the rest does not, except in our imagination. God as the creative force exist, but the God in our imagination does not exist in the same way. As the unicorn exist because we share a knowledge of unicorns, but they do not exist as creatures of nature. I think this is why holy books are careful to say, God is beyond our comprehension, and we can not know God, and we should not be too sure of what we think know. It is also said, the moment you think you know God, you know God not, but what we know can only be a limited concept of God, and this is not God. Why not cut the middle out when speaking to my great son about monsters? Because I have learn the importance of mythology. A most unfortunate thing happened when we started to believe we could explain everything with science. We began relying too much on science and lost our understanding of the importance of mythology. It is as Zeus feared. We now rival the Gods, and try to live without them. This is has made smart, but not wise. A monster represents our fears, and for darn sure a little child's fear is very real. Convincing the child that monsters do not exist, only pushes the child's fear to the next thing, and teaches him nothing of how to manage his fear. By agreeing with him that monsters exist, and convincing him he can be the master of them, he is learning how to deal with his fears and people too. Our most fearsome monsters are humanized creatures, and project our knowledge of evil into them. Like the unicorn they both exist and do not exist. This is how we deal with life. It might be smart to argue that monsters do not exist, but this sure isn't wise. Monsters, demons, angels, unicorns, Athena and Zeus all exist. This is the realm of mythology and when we understanding the part mythology in plays in our lives, we can move from smart to wise. The creative force and organizing forces do exist. This God is know through science. When we agree we can call this God, we open the door for many, many different discussions that we do not have without a concept of God. Side by side with this is mythology which helps us explore ourselves and to transition into personally strong and wise beings. This is essential in moving us from being technological smart to wise enough to manage our technology well. This shift is extremely important to human kind and perhaps the whole earth, which we could destroy if we do not gain wisdom fast enough. Without this wisdom, politics are a barbaric affair of power conflicts and nothing like the democracy our forefathers thought they were giving us.

There are several sites explaining the relationship between rising oil prices and rising unemployment. When the price of oil peaked, people defaulted on their home loans, causing a banking crisis. What is really frightening is at this time there is social unrest in Saudi Arabia. Because of the amount of oil supply that could be disrupted, this would be devastating to our economy, so yes, wall street is very nervous. The tension in Saudi Arabia has been know for years, and if the citizens here rebel, it will not be a surprise as Egypt was. Saudi Arabia's economic growth is dependent on exporting oil. Its population is increasing and the government is having a terrible time keeping with citizen demands, and not flooding the market with oil, causing the price of oil to drop. If this country gets caught up in a rebellion, it will be devastating to our economic recovery. This is one of the several sites that explains the problem. http://www.washingto...economic-crash/ I live at the lower end of the economic spectrum, and during the 1970 recession volunteered to assist the poor though St. Vincent de Paul. I intimately know what rising gas and food cost do to people who can barely make it from pay check to pay check, and do not like the news of rising gas and food cost. When things get really bad, the government takes protective measures by increasing the requirements for assistance, and cutting seriously needed programs. This means more people go without basic needs, and this destroys families. Broken families increase the problem, and this damage can effect our country for many years. Some are talking about hyper inflation if we do not get control of the economy. Our national debt is way to large and this is a very bad time to have the economic problems we will have if protesters in Saudi Arabia disrupt the oil supply. I firmly believe we need a plan for getting through an economic crisis that may be far worse than what we have experienced so far. The 1970 recession was really bad, and we are threatened by a worse one. And if that isn't bad enough, China is experiencing a trade deficit. We are borrowing money from China to stay afloat, and China's ability to continue loaning us money may be weakening, while our growing debt problem could cause interest rates on our loans to rise. At the same time the rising price of oil, is taking a big bite out of us. I am not sure, but I think may be we should ration gasoline?

Marat, thank you for the food for thought. Are you saying there is no limit to growth, as long as people treat make believe wealth as real wealth? It seems like much of the world is behaving as this were true, with the unfortunate effect of raising the interest on their loans so high, they are unable to repay the loans, and then default on the loans, reducing the make believe wealth. It is not just a problem of imagined wealth, but that imagined wealth creates a false notion of the value of real property. Somehow reality hit the housing market and people are stuck with loan payments greater than the value of their real property, and millions of dollars of wealth just disappeared. Only if our economy turns around, will these people have any chance of selling their real property for they paid for it, and just how are we suppose to turn our economy around, when such a large portion of our wealth is false wealth? Doesn't this make the housing market like a ponzi scheme, because the value of the housing was good only as long everyone believed in imagined wealth. This is not sound economic development, and we are foolish to tolerate it. Our wealth was built on oil. All industrial economies depend on oil. This isn't just about the energy that fuels cars, but the energy that fuels economic growth. The profits generated by oil, went into our banking system and back out in loans. A little bit of false wealth may be a good thing, but too much of it results in unsustainable economic growth and economic collapse. Our system is dependent on growth. What happens when there is no growth? Actually a similar problem brought Rome down. Roman's economy depended on gold as ours depends on oil. When it exhausted the gold mine, it began cutting its coins with cheaper metals, and devalued them. At the same time the Roman coin was being devalued, the expenses of Rome built during a period of real wealth, continued to grow. Rome didn't just fall to barbarians, it could no longer afford adequate defense of its borders and its own citizens were ready for a big change. Now what? The dollar or coin is worth less so it takes more of them to cover expenses, and because the population is larger and expects more, there is a double whammy of needing to pay more for less, while the demand is increased. Imagine your way out of this. Geeze, the feds and many others promised workers pension plays they can not cover. We are recognizing we have taken this game of imagined wealth too far, and I am really sweating what is going to happen next. My old body is very resistant to the idea of camping, because I can not afford housing, and if my death would mean my children will have good lives, I would gladly drop dead, but I have this notion, if I can't be part of coming up with a better plan for our future, what my children and their children face will face will not be good. Some how I have to be part of the breaking threw of denial that could mean a mass die off, and the end our civilization. Now are you going to continue relying on imagined wealth, or work on a plan for what we need to do? Sometimes we can't see the trees for the forest. Let us get some distance from this problem. I am quoting from Youngquist "GeoDistinies". Oil is finite. How long will the world benefit from oil money? How much of our wealth came from oil money, and what happens to it, now that we are importing oil and foreign oil countries have taken their oil money out of our banks? What are the bankers getting out of this and how are the peasants benefiting? What happens when the oil is exhausted? What happens if what happened to the value of the peso, continues to happen to the value of the dollar? Out of what hat will we pull the money to pay off the bankers, when there is nothing left for collateral? Oil is paying 50% to 80% of national cost in the mid east. All these nations have to figure out how to use today's oil income for the future economy, when the oil is exhausted. Don't tell me Japan, Twain do just fine without resources, tell me how the oil countries are going to make that transition. What happens to our banking system that is so reliant on oil money? How is all this going to be maintained? Perhaps we have something to learn from the fall of Rome and also from the history of dinosaurs and mammals. Big is good under the right conditions, but when conditions change, big can lead to extinction, and the meek shall inherit the earth.

For the first time in many years on the Internet, I am experiencing the pleasure of discussing God, outside of the Judo/Christian box that most people force on discussions of God. In part this is because of the quality of people attracted to SF(n), it is also because the moderators and owner have allowed this discussion to take place. This is a huge difference compared to being banned for speaking of God as a fact, and totally preventing any discussion of God that is not in the Judo/Christian box. It is the essence of the meaning of freedom of speech, because it gives us the freedom to investigate truth. I know there was concern about allowing discussion of God in a science forum, and I am very glad you made that possible.

Hot damn, the more I think on what you said, the more I think you really got something. This is exactly what I was thinking about when I woke this morning. How do people think of what is good without a concept of God? I normally contemplate God and my value to the universe when I wake and frequently throughout the day. For me, thoughts of God are like a compass. Thoughts of God hold everything that is good. It isn't just thinking about what is good, but also what is possible, and thinking of about us, and people around the world, the earth, the past and future, and the meaning of life. That is, it is wholistic and value laden thinking. That is something science lacks. Science is amoral, and often very narrowly focused. (please, don't confuse amoral with immoral, or science with scientist) By checking in with my thoughts of God, I stimulate feelings of love within myself. I think love/hate is like the energy in a battery. It needs a positive and negative post to flow. I guess both positive and negative post are in me, but the flow is from me, to my thoughts of God, and back, or if it is hate, the thoughts would be from me to an object of hate and back. If we don't have this flow, than we don't experience of energy of love and hate. This makes sense, right? If people believe in a loving God or a punishing God, their experience of God is different, right? For sure our experience of God depends on our thoughts of God. We stimulate the thought of it and experience the feelings stimulated by the thought. A child can be quite frightened by the monsters in his room, so I am giving my great grand son the thoughts he needs to master the monsters. Now those monsters are playing an important role in my great grandson gaining a sense of personal power. All the Greek Gods have power, when we hold an concept of them and call on them for help. Satan is pretty powerful for those who worship him too. For me, God is all the laws, and science is the way of studying God. For sure, if we realize it is bad water that makes people sick, we will be more successful in over coming this "evil", then if we burning people as witches. Superstition is a very bad thing when it misleads people and prevents them from taking the correct action. I think any reasonable person can realize this, and then we must check our religious beliefs about supernatural beings and events. I think it is sad when people think we have to accept all the supernatural stuff in order to have God and morals. This just isn't true.

You are right, I goofed. The term word I meant to use is "Ponzi scheme". However, my spell check doesn't like that word, and it does not seem to be in my dictionary. Patsy means someone easily imposed upon and is in my dictionary, and comes close to the meaning of a Ponzi scheme. I don't think either term is a legitimate economic term. However, I do think what I am trying to say is important and deserves more than your short comment. ! Moderator Note FTFY

Ants can control the behavior of elephants when they work together, but one ant isn't going to make much of a difference. http://www.sciencenewsline.com/biology/2010090212000013.html Unions are important.

I am hoping this thread stays close to the thread about oil, because oil has taken the place of gold in world economic systems, and now the power is shifting from the US, the first world supplier of oil, to the mid east. In general we have not been working with a good understanding of the relationship between oil and the economy. We might know the world has traded oil in dollars, but this didn't mean anything to us. Because oil was traded in dollars, all the countries wanted dollars, and this gave the dollar a high value. Mexico is not the only country that enjoyed US dollars, but as far as I know, it is the first one to shed the dollar. If other countries follow, the value of the dollar will continue to fall, further decreasing the value of the dollar. http://www.thepeople...sfully-sheds-th Another part of the story is foreign oil countries used US banks because of the high interest rates they got, but no longer get. The banks used this money for loans. A lot of these loans went to third world countries, that were charged extremely high interest rates. This was like the housing fiasco, where bankers made housing loans to people who couldn't repay the loans. The third world countries couldn't repay the loans. That means, money left our banking system and didn't come back, and that hurt our economy. Eventual the oil countries created their own banking system, so more money has left the US banking system. I could be wrong, but I suspect our banking system has become like a patsy scheme, covering up the missing money with housing loans. That fell through, so now we appear to be covering up the missing money with student loans. We have created a house of cards, because the banks do not have money they claim to have. They have loans that they hope will be repaid, plus interest, and they are making loans on the projected repayment of loans, plus interest, but they do not have money. Our gross national product is a measure of how many times a dollar changes hands, and today most of this exchange of money has nothing to do with real products. It is a make believe world of money changing hands. Unpaid loans and interest rates being like forged paper money, boosting our gross national product. How is this not a patsy scheme? If the rest of the world stops buying into our patsy scheme, we are in serious trouble. I think this was the meaning of 9/11. Those are the numbers we use in times of emergency and it was the World Trade Center that was hit. Sometimes I like to be wrong, and this is one of them.

Thanks Captain Panic. Oil revenue has covered Texas needs for many years, and given Texas a huge economic advantage. In Alaska, not only have roads, schools, services been paid by oil revenues, but citizens have gotten checks, instead of tax bills. jackson33, respectfully, trying to learn is a good thing, and you have something to learn. Right now there is a debate about increasing taxes on oil companies to help pay down the deficit. The oil industry is arguing it is best for the national revenue to not raise taxes on oil companies. Hum, how does that work? Other oil countries have nationalized oil and use the revenue to give their citizens roads, clean water, schools, etc.. We defend our economic interest around the world with tax payer paid military force. Capitalist did what they could to stop the nationalization of oil, and it is a good thing for the citizens of those countries that they did get control of their oil. I am not sure that our capitalist treatment of oil is best for our nation either, but this is a very complex subject! Cheap oil is good for economic growth, and all countries what their citizens to have cheap oil products. Taxing oil would be a cost passed on to consumers. I don't understanding how things work when the oil is nationalized. What happens to our economy when our exports are greater than our imports? Oil was our greatest export. Now we are importing oil, and our imports are greater than our exports. What might that do to national wealth? Would it make a difference in national revenue? Oil money from the oil countries around the world, was poured into our banks, and this meant our banks had a lot of money for loans. Much of this money was used for high interest foreign loans. Now the mid east has its own banking system, and we had a problem with housing loans? I am not sure, but I think there is a connection between the banks no longer being flush with foreign oil money, and real bad banking decisions? Our interest rates are too low to attract oil money from around the world, so our banking system has been loosing money. I think this turned our healthy banking system into a patsy scheme. The first hit was third world countries didn't repay their loans, and the oil money didn't keep rolling in. Then we have a housing fiasco. Now I think we are headed towards a student loan fiasco. But don't worry. Tax payers can always cover the screw ups of the banking system. They have too, because no one wins when a patsy scheme falls. But what really bothers me is the number of people who think there are no limits, and that what we are doing works, and the things will just keep getting better. Oil is traded in dollars, and that means many small countries peg their money to the dollar. All the countries did what they could to have dollars, so they didn't have to pay an exchange rate when buying oil. That really helped the value of the dollar. If the dollar looses value, it effects our economy in a big way, because of how it is intertwined with other economies.

I think you might what to look at getting a new job. Trying to change things where I worked, has never had a good outcome for me. You might try a union job, so you have a place to handle your grievences without putting your job on the line.

Understanding how God works is essential. However, when you add to this, "knowing how He thinks" the truth is distorted by humanizing something that should not be humanized. Remember when God was a she? Bad things happened when She was offended and She needed to be appeased. Whatever people's god myths are, there is a common thread. If you don't understand how things work, and do something against nature, something is going to turn bad. Science is a better way to understand how things work, then reading the stories written before scientific was developed. The more science studies the better our understanding and therefore judgment, can be. However, our perspective is very important. We can have a very narrow perspective, reacting to the world knowing no more about it than our personal experience of it. Or we can expand our point of view by trying to look at things through a god's point of view. We are doing good if we can imagine the results of reactions for the next 3 generations. That is how long a direct memory of an event last. first the child is aware of it, and then becomes a father and may pass it on to his children, and then he is a grandfather and can pass it on again to the third generation. The memory many last much longer, depending on how many people believe it is important to retell the story, or if it is something like an earthquake that sinks an island, it can last as long as there is human memory.

Is it possible we can come to an agreement about what amoral means? Mooeypoo gives a good explanation, and I like Mississippichem's follow up. Calling gravity an evil force, is right in line with believing in demons. I think some jumped from the word "amoral" to the word "immoral". Amoral doesn't mean immoral. Amoral is like the knife that can be used for life saving surgery, or to kill. Science is amoral, and the need for a concept of God is humans must learn more than science. With discussion of God comes discussions of morals, and discussion of morals leads to improved moral judgment. That is, we have to think our way through morality, and when we do this we are contemplating God. Now I am going to yell, because I know people tend to read a sentence or two and make an argument without reading the whole post. I am yelling because some people insist the word "God" can only mean the God of Abraham, and they are not getting God is an abstract, not a concrete reality. Religious people tend to make the mistake of interpreting their holy books concretely instead of abstractly, and this where the problem comes. The God of Abraham and stories of Jesus are mythology and there is also plenty of mythology associated with the US Democracy. Mythology is not necessarily a bad thing, but it should not be taken as literal truth. The word "God" is the door way into discussion of morals. Read Cicero, a Roman statesman who studied in Athens. We are compelled to do the right thing, but we do not automatically know what is the right thing, or perhaps we have an emotional/mental problem that prevents us from thinking clearly. A moral is a matter of cause and effect, but why is a moral a matter of cause and effect? Because we can know, if we do this, that is what will happen. We can know this, because the operations of the universe are predictable. If we leap off a building, we will fall down, not fly like a bird. Talking about why this is so is talking about God. This is the talk that gives science morality, even if you do not use the word "God'. If you talk about morals, the cause and effect, you are talking of God, because that is what God is.

You do not know me and should not attempt to judge me. So what if you disagree with me. That is not an argument, but only an opinion, that brings this discussion to a dead end. You do not know me and should not attempt to judge me. So what if you disagree with me. That is not an argument, but only an opinion, that brings this discussion to a dead end. Please explain what science has to do with morals. I have said, with science we can make better moral decisions. That is because information improves our decision making. Scientist can be highly moral people, but from where do they get their morality? What branch of science studies morals? There is a branch of science that does, but I am not aware of physics or math being a study in morality.

I hate it when people are in complete denial of reality. Oh well.

Thanks

There was a time in the US when most of its revenue came from exporting oil. A national debt is not just about how much a nation spends, but also how great is its revenue. There is a slight revenue difference between being the world's supply of oil and having to import it. I will ask again, any idea what will happen when the mid east runs out of oil? The greatest expense the US has is military expenses, and considering its economy would collapse without oil, it is unlikely to cut its military spending by much. I know this is way off topic, but I think much of the world lost interest in colonizing the north America when they did not find gold. Today, oil is to world economies what gold was then. We have to control it for economic reasons, and our military expenses are part of the true cost of oil. How do you diversify an economy without the resources to build an economy? Seriously give the need for resources some thought, and tell me what are the resources the mid east is going to use for its economy when the oil is gone? Consider, oil was the greatest source of revenue the US had and that it was a very rich nation, that could avoid debt, and now it must import oil and can not avoid debt. What is the difference that makes to the economy?

I disagree with you about science being good enough, especially after engaging in the discussions here. I am very concerned about the lack of consideration of values and morals here. Especially disappointing to me is the discussions of education. People jumped to say what a good curriculum is, but not to discuss the purpose of education. This is a serious gap in the thinking, because culture is so important to what humans do and do not do, and culture is learned. People need to give some thought to what a good culture is like and how it is taught, and they are not. Their point of view is too small, and what they see from their point of view is too narrow. Science is amoral and amoral people do not have good moral judgment. Science can improve their moral judgment, but doesn't motivate them to have moral judgment. Individuals with no concept of God, do not come close to having the perspective needed for good moral judgment. Holding a concept of God is kind of like climbing on a high mountain and having a broader view of everything. In AA this is called the higher self, and the God is left undefined. When we perceive ourselves as spiritual beings having a human experience, it changes our relationship with everything, and this resolves some serious human problems we tend to have. Biologically we are designed to have a sense of community, but we are also very limited in our capacity to be intimate with others on a meaningful level. Here is where a mythology becomes very important. This mythology needs a concept of God and the meaning of being human. This means many people having different ideas of the same thing, not everyone thinking the same about different things. When religion demands everyone thinks the same, that is when it becomes destructive. It is sad that religion tells us we can not know God, and then humans create a God we can know, and personalize this deity. Then the mythology to end trouble, becomes the mythology creating trouble. This is so much the result of the limits of our brain and therefore the limit of the number people we can be intimate with. Like troops of primates divide when they get large, so do humans divide into smaller groups. Religion and nationalism unite these small groups, and then they break down into smaller groups again. We need a unifying mythology that avoids the break down problem, and that begins with an unknown God. That is, it begins by standing on the mountain, and is about us, not about self. What Hegel and Nietzsche did to Christian mythology is not good, and the US replaced Greek and Roman philosophy with German philosophy and now is what it fought against. This problem is exasperated with Islam, because this divide increases a focus on differences and competition to prove who is God's favorite people, making this statement true- religion is good for war and war is good for religion. This is really nuts. There is a mythology that resolves this problem, but it isn't explained in one holy book, and it is pagan. Religious people are sure the pagans are their enemy, so we must avoid exasperating this division. We must convert them as they once converted pagans, if we are to have peace and move forward, raising the human potential to a new plateau. Picky, picky, picky I am going to nit pick here. Making an axe is not science, but technology. Using technology does not require science, which is abstract thinking dependent on theory. Egypt achieved a lot with technology, and then Greeks studied around the world, and developed the theories that separate science from technology.

Yeah, I am thinking that is a curious stretch of the imagination. I believe the idea of demons comes form what was the Persian area, and is the result of mirages and possibly drugs. Zoroastrianism divided the spiritual realm between the light and the darkness, and this division and demons influenced Christianity. Zoroastrianism was influenced by the developing religion of India, and there two we have a story of the battle between good and evil, and many beings.