Whats Psychology got to say about God

[ZWord]

What exactly is the difference between creating your own goals and taking responsibility for your life?

And why do you prefer to say that you are God, than that you are an aspect of God?

Why shouldn't #God exist independently of human individuals?

Why do you want to kill him?

have to go.

 

[s.norbury]

Psychology being the science of divisionists says that we must listen to gods messengers not god direct

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Freud had a lot to say about God and religion, part of which is that the idea of god as father is related to the odepus complex. Make of it what you will.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Why do you want to kill him?

See above. Odepus complex, innit.

 

[laptop]

See above. Odepus complex, innit.

Or (see further above) a desire to make the voices stop.

I should add that I don't necessarily believe Jaynes. I suspected while reading the book that he might have an undeclared interest, and in many ways it's as bonkers as, say, Graves' White Goddess. But it was interesting enough to persuade me to go and read the Iliad - and, at least in the translation I have, he's right about no-one expressing an individual intention, rather all intentions being ascribed to the voices of the gods.

And I'll take him over that old coke-fiend from Vienna any day

 

[ska invita]

Can anyone summarize Nietszche's death of god bit in a little post - ta.

 

[fela fan]

Freud had a lot to say about God and religion, part of which is that the idea of god as father is related to the odepus complex. Make of it what you will.

Over the years fromm went from basing a lot of his writings on freud (and marx), but in time came to recognise a lot of freud's work was fatally flawed by not taking in the full picture.

And from memory it was over something like fatherly love, certainly to do with the father any rate.

 

[ZWord]

I haven't read how he presents this, But I can take some guesses.

As far as I remember, the quote is that Nietzche presented it as news.. the news being "God is dead, and we killed him."

I have read quite a bit of beyond good and evil, and it might be part of this book as it fits right in.

I think what Nietzche was tapping into is that in his time, christianity had become so bogus, that it had become completely bereft of spiritual power, it was just a dead relic, of something once totally alive. (he was the type of schizo guy who had his ways of tapping into what was happening at a spiritual level)

And the point was, we killed God: given that God's power on earth is mediated through humanity, when humanity corrupted God's message to earth, by turning christianity into bourgeois capitalist morality, made communion a dead ritual, they were no longer believing in the same God. So God died, and was reborn this century in a new form.

Funnily enough, Nietzche's stuff about the need therefore to practise spiritually to become supermen, is quite similar to what fela is saying, though I doubt he's fela's source.

 

[ZWord]

Oh fela, there you are, I was replying to niksativa.

But yes, I was asking you, what exactly is the difference between choosing your own goals, and taking responsibility for your life? And a few other questions.

 

[ZWord]

Well if you won't reply, I have to suggest that maybe new age doctrine, though appealing, has some incoherencies.

 

[118118]

Well if you won't reply, I have to suggest that maybe new age doctrine, though appealing, has some incoherencies.

Erm, its not difficult to think up answers to those questions that are consistent as anything, I don't think you've shown anything there.

 

[Sid's Snake]

There is no point in a debate like this - to link

in fact, i think its bad manners

 

[118118]

Well, if that was at me, then erm, I was just pointing out a plain fact, that those questions can be given coherent answers to, but I don't want to put words in people's mouths. Erm, I wasn't having a go.

I mean, IME most ideas can be passed as coherent

 

[frogwoman]

Good for you, frogwoman

i hope you really mean that and that you aren't just being a patronising fecker...

of course, if you are, then ... patronising fecker

 

[Sid's Snake]

i hope you really mean that and that you aren't just being a patronising fecker...

of course, if you are, then ... patronising fecker

No, I really meant it, don't be silly

 

[frogwoman]

ahh... that's ok then! note to self - stop being so cynical

 

[Jazzz]

froggie your pm box has been full for several days now.

As you were!

 

[fela fan]

Well if you won't reply, I have to suggest that maybe new age doctrine, though appealing, has some incoherencies.

I'm six hours ahead of you mate, and i was only quickly popping in here before going off in the middle of the night to watch arsenal!

Accordingly my brain is not working in normal order today, beers and excitement have taken their toll.

But this is a topic most central to me and i will reply more in time. Let me see what i can say now though.

"Funnily enough, Nietzche's stuff about the need therefore to practise spiritually to become supermen, is quite similar to what fela is saying, though I doubt he's fela's source."

I've never read any of him, but only seen others quote him. To be honest, nobody is my source, only thousands of hours of thinking time in the hammock in the tropical islands of thailand...

It hit me one day just who or what God exactly is (about six or seven years ago i think). I kept it to myself for quite some time coz it sounded somewhat absurd. But i was sure. And in time i've found others saying the same thing. Not explicitly, but the message is there nonetheless. And that is that we are God. I am, you are, everybody is. But only after a certain path of discovery has been negotiated.

When i say we must kill God, based on what i've just said, all we've actually got to kill is an idea, albeit one that has been indoctrinated into us from centuries of human thinking. We are born God, but by the time the parents and teachers and politicians and priests and society and all the others have had their influence on us, this is well and truly hidden. It then becomes a process, a path, of various discoveries before we can make this leap of faith.

Once made, we recognise that we are solely responsible for our own actions and our own completely accidental life.

For me personally this has meant total freedom, and i can only say it's the sweetest thing in the world. I can also say that it will bring about a fair bit of antagonism from others, but it goes with the territory.

More later when i have more time and more brain cells.

 

[fela fan]

Edited to add, possibly by killing God, fela means debunking shit ideas about God, in which case we're not really in disagreement. But I don't really like that way of putting it.

I didn't see this bit first time round.

Like i said an hour or so ago, my idea is not so much killing off God, more killing off the God we've been told exists.

Finding out that the real God is ourselves. Whose only rule in life should be to respect nature, oneself, and others.

The sweet freedom that is available to humans can only be fully grasped once we stop blaming others for things. And there being a God as we've been told there is always leaves us with the ultimate cop out.

And i'd add, that by realising and becoming this God, we cannot do so without taming our ego. We cannot realistically get rid of our ego (although we certainly can do this), but by observing it at all times, we can keep a lid on it and avoid its destructiveness.

 

[fela fan]

Oh fela, there you are, I was replying to niksativa.

But yes, I was asking you, what exactly is the difference between choosing your own goals, and taking responsibility for your life? And a few other questions.

This is an interesting sideline. I think goals are far less important than the journey getting there. I think also that if one lives 'spiritually' then the journey is life. The only destination we have in life is death, so i think it wiser to not have goals! We are taught that our lives revolve round success and failure, but if we have no objectives or expectations we can never fail. And success will be meaningless.

Whatever happens happens, whatever is is. Taking responsibility is no more or no less than stopping blaming others. Remove blame, shame, and guilt from one's life. Accept everything.

btw, i also think God is nature.

 

[Structaural]

PM me if you want this. I can't and don't wish to post it all:

(you need to clear your box)

 

[ska invita]

When i say we must kill God, based on what i've just said, all we've actually got to kill is an idea, albeit one that has been indoctrinated into us from centuries of human thinking. We are born God
[...]
Once made, we recognise that we are solely responsible for our own actions in our own completely accidental life.

Psychologically what you decribe is a process that might be described along the lines of "centring yourself within the ego"

This is not to say you are egotistical - often the next step in this process is a "killing of the ego", or a supression of overt self-interest - but I think to get to this step requires a lot of internal ego-driven dialogue.

If what I say is true than the concept/s of God/s that we kill is some form of splitting of the ego - by killing God/s we unite the ego and make it whole.

I dont know shit about psychology so this may be completely wrong - "ego" is about the only psychological term I know (what is "id" for example?) so maybe I am placing too much emphasis on it.

I know what you mean that if we are born God, and can kill God off to become God again, but I think it is important to reposition "the self" within an infinite universe of posibility and as an interlocking piece of it, rather than at the cetnre of it - being at the centre is perhaps another characteristic we bestow on God, and to directly replace God with ourselves without this repositioning leads to megelamania and arrogance.
-----------------------------------
I looked it up:
The ego, superego, and id are the divisions of the psyche according to the psychoanalytic theory developed by Sigmund Freud.

The id contains "primitive desires" (hunger, rage and sex), the superego contains internalized norms, morality and taboos, and the ego mediates between the two and may include or give rise to the sense of self.

I think those are categorical distinctions that are fair enough to make.

~~~A Last thought: it is interesting that many of us turn to God when we feel desperate and out of control - we've tried our best, reach our limits so turn and ask for help - of course by our analysis we are turning to ourselves and asking ourselves for that extra bit of hlep - often this has a positive and calming effect.

Its like a crude form of meditation or desperate internal dialogue in which we reserve a part of our psyche with supernatural powers and access it in rimes of trouble. Maybe.

 

[Sid's Snake]

When i say we must kill God, based on what i've just said

Are you saying we should kill God based on what you said

 

[fela fan]

~~~A Last thought: it is interesting that many of us turn to God when we feel desperate and out of control - we've tried our best, reach our limits so turn and ask for help - of course by our analysis we are turning to ourselves and asking ourselves for that extra bit of hlep - often this has a positive and calming effect.

Yeah, but going by my line, once we've recognised who God really is (ie, ourselves), we will no longer feel desperate and out of control. We are able to have no emotional attachment to the stimulus that previously would make us feel negative.

Having said that, i do know that in times of stress (increasingly infrequent for me) i get out into the mountains around where i live. In other words i turn to nature to revive myself. And to me God can also be viewed as nature.

In fact as i write this i realise that i am talking about alternating between two Gods - me and nature. I need to think about that one!

And be careful of what freud says, he lived a long time ago, and he got a few fundamentals wrong. Looking at psychology alone will never provide complete answers. It is but one discipline taken from the whole. Look at a part, and you only get part of the answer.

 

[Sid's Snake]

In fact as i write this i realise that i am talking about alternating between two Gods.

You wanted to kill him yesterday

Based on what you said

 

[fela fan]

You wanted to kill him yesterday

Based on what you said

I thought i'd been clear. Allow me to clarify if i haven't been.

God does not exist, never did, well at least not once six days were up. He's never been seen since!

In order for a human to achieve his/her full potential in life they must kill off this idea that there is a God, a 'person' that humans have been indoctrinated down the years to believe in.

It's not God that needs killing off, it's the idea of God that needs killing off. If freedom is desired that is. But the demands of the ego must also go at the same time. That is perhaps why God is such an appealing idea, but we can never be free. Fromm postulates that we are afraid of this freedom, and that makes perfect sense to me.

When one realises who God is, ie oneself, and/or nature, then the other God (the one we were indoctrinated into believing) just dies off of its own accord. Actually that is an important distinction: we don't kill God off, we reach a certain understanding in life, and when we do, God just dies anyway. We don't need no knives or bullets...!

 

[Sid's Snake]

OK, but how do you suggest we do all that?

Seems like rather a lot, and rather difficult too

Does it involve drugs?

 

[fela fan]

OK, but how do you suggest we do all that?

Seems like rather a lot, and rather difficult too

Does it involve drugs?

Well, if you subscribe to the theory that at any one time in our life we are the sum of all our experiences, then yes, it included drugs with me!

Since i can remember i wanted to know the answer to the question 'what is the meaning of life'.

I finally got the answer when i realised i had to drop the question. But leading up to that i also discovered the non-existence of God as we've been told about him. Religion and politics are the organising mechanisms for those who wish to dominate us. Without God, they will be up the shit creek without a paddle.

As to how you do that, dunno mate, up to you! But if you look, listen, read, you'll find...

... but maybe some tips: say these to yourself, and if you mean it, then you can find!

I don't care about anything.
Whatever happens happens.
Nothing matters.
I am a nobody, and i want to be a nobody. I absolutely do not want to be a somebody.

And keep a keen eye on your ego at all times. Observe it as if it was someone else's. When you are in times of no ego, you are your own God. Use nature to help you.

 

[Sid's Snake]

The awful thing is fela, I actually agree with you

Despite being entirely won over by your good natured enthusiasm I still think the way you put it just makes it sound a little too, well, simple.

Its a bit like walking into the House of Commons and saying, "look fellas, I've got this blinding idea - let's all love each other! Coz we're basically alright. All we need is a big fat spliff, some quality time in a hammock, a bit fo a think - oh, and a residence in some earthly paradise..."


Maybe its just me

 

[ZWord]

Thanks for that fela, and sorry I was being a bit impatient.

This is actually a subject that pushes various buttons with me. I certainly don't like to say "there is a God." Because putting the "a" in just seems like an irrelevant qualifier, as if you might say, there's a god, look, and there's another God. saying "there is *God*." seems to me to be a better way of putting it.

All in all, I don't think it's a good idea to say that everyone is God, but not because it's not true.

It's just that this is knowledge that's been around for a very long time, and it's also generally been traditional not to talk about it. You see, right now, I'm not God, I'm just me, kind of small, and maybe a bit of a nobody, and I know enough to tell the difference between when I'm God, and when I'm not properly connected to myself.

A good long while ago, at the Warp in 1999, I was listening to some sort of talking circle, and people were saying various things about what was going on, and then this drunk guy stands up, and kind of drones on in a drunk way, saying "We're all the Buddha, we're all the Christ, we're all one, we're all God, blah.. " And it seemed so offkey to me, that I just thought, well, you're not. you're just a drunken boor, spouting shit you've heard from someone else that you haven't realised for yourself, and I've heard this from loads of people, who didn't strike me as particularly divine, and I think, now that you think you know it, how will you ever truly realise it? Maybe it's my problem that I don't see everyone as God, but I don't; honestly, I see being God as being something people are capable of, but achieve really rather rarely.

I'm not sure whether we have the same idea of God. My idea is kind of that there are different levels of consciousness, including for example, humanity's consciousness that we dont' generally have access to as individuals, but which has access to all our individual minds, and then probably a level above that, and so on. (And personally, I don't find the idea that God is an abstract noun without a physical manifestation and so doesn't exist, any more compelling than the idea that humanity is an abstract noun without a physical manifestation and so doesn't exist.) But, it's interesting to note that the idea of killing off old ideas of God, and replacing them with new ones was central to early christianity, which was about replacing the image of God as the stern judgemental lawgiver, with the idea of God as Love. Anyway, I'm rambling. What was I thinking?

If we're all God, how many Gods are there are?

I must admit, none of this has anything to do with the original thread question. Which I'd like to say a few things about, but maybe in a later post.