From: ASpidle@aol.com
Date: Sun Feb 28 1999 - 16:01:21 MST
In a message dated 2/28/99 11:27:12 AM, JR wrote:
<<
Sounds like a cagey kind of supreme being. Anyway, whatever created this
"supreme being" seems immensely more deserving of my attention than a paltry
deity that can't even provide evidence of its own existence (or even make
its name known -- some call it Allah, others call it Jehovah, etc.). The
Natural Laws that formed the universe, accordingly appear more interesting
than a bank of holy AI dedicated to retrieving ego-laden protoplasmic
carbon-based molecules.>>
Thanks JR. This is "the topic" for me, so I'd prefer keeping it public. My
understanding of God is that he is an emergent property of us or our
successors after we've been mentally augmented and networked together with
each other and all the then existant computers, databases, AIs, etc. (remember
the great looking Borg with firewalls scenario).
It is his mastery of the Natural laws (he doesn't exist outside them) that
makes him God, in my opinion.
And I agree with you that whoever created this "Supreme Being" , that's us -
by the way - immensely deserves our attention.
As for "ego-laden protoplasmic carbon-based molecules," I sure love mine and
those that belong(ed) to the people I love. How about you?
If I had one goal for this list, it is that I would like all you brilliant
brave young atheists to appreciate the wonderful, heroic, inspiring, selfless,
loving members of our species and stop thinking of them as "ego-laden
protoplasmic carbon-based molecules" or "the junk that was accidentally
selected."
I really believe that the "Standard Dogma" has been wrongly used to justify
this ugly attitude (or meme perhaps) among our brightest people. It's time to
critically examine this "metareligion" and restore some sense of sacredness to
life.
Adrian
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:11 MST