Back To Top
First off I’d like to come clean and state that I’m actually more atheist than anything else. That said, I’d be a lousy philosopher to ignore religion entirely so I’ve spent inordinate amounts of time reading about and contemplating its many avenues of thought and what I’ve determined after decades of analysis is that everyone is correct. No matter your opinion on god, you’re at least metaphorically accurate in our known universe (possibly literally accurate in some unknown universe)
What I mean is that the universe is capable of doing everything that gods are said to be. It creates life, it’s timeless but contains time, its essence gives rise to laws which absolutely must be obeyed at all times, it has a plan for everyone, it causes all natural catastrophes, and so on and so on. Even destiny can simply be explained by the predetermined outcome as a sum of all prior events which are caused by natural law (the universe)
The truest perspective on the matter, though, in my humble opinion, can’t ever be obtained by an individual. Imagine two philosophers, one on top of a transparent glass table and the other beneath it. On the table spins a quarter. The philosopher above the quarter says absolutely that the quarter spins clockwise. The philosopher below scoffs and smugly maintains that it rotates counter clockwise. This analogy might seam simple and pointless on its surface but it actually does a great job of describing how subjective interpretation of the universe around us can be. It also makes me wonder if I might have been one of these foolish philosophers arguing about something that they were both correct about. We observe the (at least) four dimensional world (universe) in three dimensions and from only one perspective. It follows that we could be wrong from any other perspective but still correct. If god = the universe, then it can only be understood by the sum of all perspectives in the universe over the course of an eternity, since that sum would be the closest thing to a four dimensional perspective. Which kinda drives the assumption that only god can truly comprehend god (or the universe if you like) and would explain why no pious man has yet been able to simply explain what god actually is or what its motivation might be
It also insulates the science man from embarrassment in much the same way since it would be unrealistic to expect any single person to have these answers about something they observe in less dimensions than it operates
Another way to bolster my argument that god and the universe are the same thing and that we’re all correct and incorrect simultaneously, would be to tell the tale of Socrates and Chaerephon (hope I spelled that correctly). Although this tale too is told by a single author and might be subject to flawed reasoning in some other perspective. But it’s a great tale
So Chaerephon was supposedly a friend of Socrates. One day he ventured out to speak to the Oracle of Delphi to inquire who was the wisest man in Greece. To which the oracle responded “there is no one wiser than Socrates”
Chaerephon felt it mandatory to inform Socrates of this, obviously, but Socrates was not pleased by the information. Instead he was in disbelief. He wanted proof so he went out and, naturally, questioned those who were considered to be wise. In his endeavor, he learned that everyone who claimed to be wise actually wasn’t. They only believed they were.
His conclusion? The oracle was correct. But not because he arrogantly accepted the title out of competitive desire. He believed it because he was the only person who knew he wasn’t truly wise, paradoxically making him wiser than everyone else
Let me know what you think about this. Is God just a metaphor for the universe? Or is the universe a metaphor for God? Or am I way off?