Plus it would be better people to stop wondering why they exist and focus all of their energy on how they can exist in the best way they could.Doesnt sound that bad to me. — dimosthenis9

No, that would be very bad indeed, as you rob people of the truth of their own origins. The best way people can live, in my opinion is to fully know their origin story. Humans have never stopped asking for those answers since they were able to. God had better not exist because it has utterly failed us as a parent/guardian. We can, and want to, and will be, masters of our own destiny as a species, but not if some omnigod just created us for its own entertainment, as it found its omni status unsatisfactory.

No, that would be very bad indeed, as you rob people of the truth of their own origins. — universeness

So now that let's say God exists you are sure of your origin aw??

but not if some omnigod just created us for its own entertainment, as it found its omni status unsatisfactory — universeness

Even if that was the case you would never know it.You would be sure for example that your existences is a random thing.So what's the harm there?You wouldn't have any anxiety at all about God as people have now that don't even know if he exists for sure.You would have an answer at least.Still sounds much better to me.

We can, and want to, and will be, masters of our own destiny as a species, — universeness

Doesn't seem that way though the way things are now.Since most people consider God as their master.
God also seems to have much fun already, seeing his "kids" as you say keep wondering about his existence or not.And slaughtering each other without him intervening.But you don't seem to be bothered by that.

So now that let's say God exists you are sure of your origin aw?? — dimosthenis9

Perhaps you could reword this as I cannot make much sense of it.

Even if that was the case you would never know it.You would be sure for example that your existences is a random thing.So what's the harm there? — dimosthenis9

Are you an advocate of the 'ignorance is bliss' approach to living your life?
The problem you role played was AN EXISTENT, deceptive, hidden god. The harm would be in the greatest deception in history, a creator who decided to remain anonymous for no logical reason that its creations are likely to accept as valid.
If you personally, would not find such divine deception disturbing and very harmful, then perhaps you would be content with a human race whose children never know who there parents are.
Just humans, genetically produced in labs. I think there have been such dystopian visions of the future.
'Brave New World,' by Aldus Huxley springs to mind. Is that a future you are attracted to for your fellow humans?

Doesn't seem that way though the way things are now. — dimosthenis9

Give us a chance pal! Its only 2022.(or even 10,022. if you prefer.) Even the dinosaurs had 150 million years and even thats not so long in the 13.8 billion years, estimated for this universe.

God as their master.
God also seems to have much fun already, seeing his "kids" as you say keep wondering about his existence or not.And slaughtering each other without him intervening.But you don't seem to be bothered by that. — dimosthenis9

Of course I am bothered about it. I am a hardline atheist. I want to convince everyone that gods do not, and never have, existed. So, using it as an excuse to slaughter each other, will no longer wash. Those who slaughter, will no longer have that crutch. You leave it open as you allow god to exist as a hidden, ineffable presence. I don't think you should choose to role play god, especially when you make such bad decisions when you do. You could simply declare god as a non-existent and invest your energies in future science's ability to answer origin questions.

. I don't think you should choose to role play god, especially when you make such bad decisions when you do — universeness

Well it's not in my future plans.So no worries.

:smile: I am glad you will reject the offer in the future and hopefully the irrational thinking behind it.

I m glad you are glad.Though supposing there is God indeed,his way of "thinking" is way more irrational than mine.

I certainly agree that a human is a much more rational proposal for an existent that can give purpose to this universe, compared to an omnigod. We can ask and answer questions. An omnigod by definition cannot have any questions, so I cannot perceive a purpose or need for it to exist.

. No doubt, humans would still find nasty ways to settle disputes without using the 'in gods name' excuse or the 'god made me/wanted me to do it,' excuse. — universeness

For sure they would. You don't need to use a concept of God to commit crimes. Most crimes are done without any reference to such an entity. Im sure atheists and agnostics also commit crimes.

Doing a crime in Gods name is basically an assertion that you have some special deeper understanding of reality or knowledge or truth (assuming such a God as the origin of existence), as for because "they made me" that's irrelevant because they would have technically made everyone and everything. Its a moot point. It doesn't place one's opinion on higher ranking.

An omnigod by definition cannot have any questions, so I cannot perceive a purpose or need for it to exist.
1d — universeness

Wouldn't "the questioned" have to exist for us to question it?
If the universe = "All information", sure it may not be able to ask questions, but from it emerged things that can - us.

So the universes laws and principles contained the information neccesary to generate a conscious questioner within it.

We can and build the "All knowledge" from the "all information". In the sense that knowledge differs from information in that it is information ordered/structured and classified in a logical rationally associated way within the mind of a consciously aware being.

In essence, wouldnt an omnigod as the true reality, the collective sphere of answers, have a purpose - to be the object of observation and questioning by sentience that doesn't yet have all the answers or the whole truth. But can question, and rationalise and experiment with answers.

I m glad you are glad.Though supposing there is God indeed,his way of "thinking" is way more irrational than mine. — dimosthenis9

Well we are "negentropic" by definition.That is to say "Life" goes against the increasing entropy flow of the universe, the chaos, the disorder.

We as living things are very much rational, orderly, self controlled, self organizing and self regulated beings.

When our bodies skew off into irrationality and chaos we get ill and die and are no longer orderly living systems.

And I suspect the same is for our mind and thoughts. When they get severely irrational we end up either harming ourselves or others. As irrationality/chaos naturally erodes order/rationality.

So to circle back to the quote. I think if there is a God, his (or her - who knows) way of thinking is for sure both rational - creative, and irrational - destructive. You cannot have one without the other.

Doing a crime in Gods name is basically an assertion that you have some special deeper understanding of reality or knowledge or truth (assuming such a God as the origin of existence), as for because "they made me" that's irrelevant because they would have technically made everyone and everything. Its a moot point. It doesn't place one's opinion on higher ranking. — Benj96

I think it's deeper that that. If you claim you are acting in accordance with gods will or instruction or 'revealed word,' then you will insist there is no 'crime' involved.
Exodus 22:18 'Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live,' is the BS verse that caused the death of many an accused innocent. Those who did such murder were convicted of no crime at the time.
Theists can also hurt you physically or mentally or economically for many other reasons they believe are fully sanctioned by their god. Your sexual preference, your blasphemy, your apostasy to mention but a few from a large list. Many Christian theists for example do indeed see some of the OT gods heinous acts as on a 'higher ranking' and certainly not criminal. They fully endorse such events as gods reaction to children who called his prophet Elisha 'baldy.':
Kings 2:23-24 He went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys.

Wouldn't "the questioned" have to exist for us to question it?
If the universe = "All information", sure it may not be able to ask questions, but from it emerged things that can - us. — Benj96

No, because paradox will always be encountered. For example, you cannot reference 'nothing' as you need 'something' to do so, like the word 'nothing.' So 'nothing' has no existent even though we CAN reference the concept through the label 'nothing,' denoting the 'absence of something.' The existence of the god label or the god concept, is no evidence AT ALL for the existence of an actual god. Just like the labels pixie, unicorn or 'holy shit,' is no evidence that any of those have an existent either.

In essence, wouldnt an omnigod as the true reality, the collective sphere of answers, have a purpose - to be the object of observation and questioning by sentience that doesn't yet have all the answers or the whole truth. But can question, and rationalise and experiment with answers. — Benj96

Anything is possible Ben! I suppose! But for me, such musings only offer you a 'landing zone based on your own credence judgement.' YOU, I, WE can only assign a personal credence level to such musing as you are presenting here. I assign close to 0 credence to the idea that if I can imagine it then it has some modicum of existence. An image of my credence level for such a suggestion would be: :roll:

Isn't that one of those unanswerable questions? If by "God" is meant "know-it-all" and such? :) Until omniscient, it's not really possible to answer.

Other than that (2m:22s)...

I would give everyone else god powers and then watch us all fight to the death in all the chaos.

I would give everyone else god powers and then watch us all fight to the death in all the chaos — Cobra

Oh the irony. Because I feel humanity is as close to a "God" as any animal has ever come to evolutionarily. We wield the power of the atomic bomb, unfathomable knowledge in every discipline imaginable, stored in warehouse upon warehouse of servers around the globe, able to survive essentially all but the most hostile environments on earth. And soon to extend that to space itself.

We are everywhere on earth, omnipresent - all 8 billions of us, if not geographically than certainly in cyberspace. We are arguably the most successful of all of mother nature's species, able to offset our own genetic flaws through medicine, sustain ourselves longer and longer with every century that passes. Overcoming hurdles in every domain.

My question to you would be, if knowing humans are fundamentally competitive and can be reduced to mere survival at all costs, why give them each God like power? Would you enjoy observing the chaos and fight to the death?

And if we all had the same power wouldnt we be truly equal? Unlike the current state of affairs where the wealthy and political have much more authority and power than the impoverished, who can barely survive.

My question to you would be, if knowing humans are fundamentally competitive and can be reduced to mere survival at all costs, why give them each God like power? — Benj96

See below. If we all have god powers, no one has god powers or we all have god powers and wouldn't make much a difference. We would form "god societies" and form different norms, rules and laws that all revolve around our powers, but that's me being extremely anthrocentric.

I suspect most gods wouldn't even remain around. A great deal of gods would simply leave out of boredom, assuming they had the capacity to feel it. Most won't even interact the way humans do. I think most would be solitary and occupy different regions of the universe or exist outside of it entirely creating their own.

And if we all had the same power wouldnt we be truly equal — Benj96

Humans are equal in flesh and as an abiotic species. The same would hypothetically apply if we were all made gods with the same powers. Killing each other will either be more effective or not that effective at all.

Once god powers are given, they are no longer human. And most won't stay around to compete or participate in politics. I know I wouldn't. The narcissists would probably stay because they have nothing else to live for. That's assuming gods have the capacity to even develop flesh-brained disorders.

Unless you're talking about super-HUMAN powers? I still think even then most primitive humans will die off and kill each other, the super-humans will be more intelligent, less stupid and less competitive.

God for a day, well first the normal stuff, erase poverty, clean endless energy sources to humans, enforce meritocracy worldwide and severe pain at lying for own profit.

But more controversial - I would induce an enzyme in the wise to embrace FUN knowledge. Not killing all happiness by striving for certainty, arguing, logic and all that kind of meticulous bs. But rather the “whats the 10 biggest towns in Mexico” thrill one had as a child.

erase poverty — Ansiktsburk

Would you have to erase money and wealth also then? As the whole system is based on an object of value that can be hoarded/accrued. You cannot have wealth without poverty, its what gives value to money (driven by fear/survival and competition).

Would we go back to a state of doing things for others not for money but out of compassion? Or love for our work.

severe pain at lying for own profit. — Ansiktsburk

If severe pain occurs for lying in order to profit, but you've already abolished the monetary system above, then how could they profit? Money would have no value in a system where you can never be poor and can just stop, relax, be unproductive - as you know your home, food and water will be taken care of, why work? And why capitalise?

Not killing all happiness by striving for certainty, arguing, logic and all that kind of meticulous bs. — Ansiktsburk

So if everyone who was quote clever is induced to not seek out certainty, concrete facts and logic, what would happen to the cold, meticulous, sterile ans objective nature of science? Would you have a world where science is dead. Anyone who tries to do it just becomes super fun and "oh whatever anyways" about it.

I like the premise of your ideas. They sound noble and good willed in theory. However I think the outcomes in practice could be pretty disastrous if not even contradictory.

"Enforce meritocracy" sounds like a contradiction of terms. As does "induce embracing".
It sounds like "totalitarian/autocratic free will" which don't seem to go hand in hand.

Essentially, in summary, enslaved to doing right by others (merit) and forced/induced to only think in fun ways. Totally controlled in essence. No free will to be bad, selfish, or boring and thus no meaning to their opposites - good, selflessness and fun.

I suspect most gods wouldn't even remain around. A great deal of gods would simply leave out of boredom, assuming they had the capacity to feel it. Most won't even interact the way humans do. I think most would be solitary and occupy different regions of the universe or exist outside of it entirely creating their own. — Cobra

This sounds like an analogy for exactly what humans do anyways. Leave when they're bored, argue if they're narcisstic, choose introversion over extroversion sometimes, or create their own "delusional" or "highly eccentric" sense of reality through intense denial of the status quo/convention/norms.

I think if everyone was elevated to god like power, nothing would change. Just as if the universe expands at the same rate everywhere, nothing gets larger relative to anything else.

Because "Power" is a dynamic between the a). most powerful and B). the powerless. Power only has power if someone else doesn't have it.

So elevating everyone to god status, giving them all the ability to float, shapeshift, be immortal, etc. If everyone has these powers, sure the dynamic of physics and chemistry and biology would certainly be different, self identity would be different momentarily (if we are to ever forget what it was like to be human), but all in all interactions between gods would be much the same as if they had always remained human.

If everything changes equally for everyone, then nothing changes.

"Enforce meritocracy" sounds like a contradiction of terms. As does "induce embracing".
It sounds like "totalitarian/autocratic free will" which don't seem to go hand in hand.

Essentially, in summary, enslaved to doing right by others (merit) and forced/induced to only think in fun ways. Totally controlled in essence. No free will to be bad, selfish, or boring and thus no meaning to their opposites - good, selflessness and fun. — Benj96

Enfore meritocracy is by no means a contradiction, remember I am God. My goal is not the pleasure for mothers of rich cultural and social captial to “make offspring happy” and “seeking life fulfilment”. There is a good portion of coercion and conformance in meritocracy. If you “feel enslaved” by being lazy and letting the others do the hard work its your funeral. Or rather, you lazy, you serve. That’s the choice you have. A fair race. And of course, everyone works office, hospital, factory hours.

But sure, the ones spoiled rotten by mothers that “just want to see their offspring happy” will, lets say, feel a decrease if own free will exploitation. Thats what happens when a guy with working class roots becomes God.

I’d make the universe a fantastical Culture style utopia and give myself the means to remain the most powerful even after my time as God is over.

a fantastical Culture style utopia — Captain Homicide

As in Iain M. Banks's Culture civilization, I take it?

give myself the means to remain the most powerful even after my time as God is over. — Captain Homicide

Wouldnt that mean you are still ultimately God? If your potency overcomes all challenge?

There is a good portion of coercion and conformance in meritocracy — Ansiktsburk

That is true. Your merit is judged by others, thus you are coerced by convention to appeal or conform to the majority, ideally all.

Thats what happens when a guy with working class roots becomes God. — Ansiktsburk

So from what I understand, you would correct the biases and prejudices that have been in place until now? Reform the system in an equilibrium where wealth is replaced by merit?

I like this. Those who show the most capability/promise to provide for all humanity ought to be empowered to do so, regardless of background.

But doesn't empowering someone on merit naturally lead to disequilibrium? To anyone who argues against them do you merely say "shhhh" or do you entertain their qualms?

Yes.
No. If you aren’t omnipotent, omniscient etc then you aren’t God. It’s possible to be extremely powerful but not omnipotent.

But doesn't empowering someone on merit naturally lead to disequilibrium? To anyone who argues against them do you merely say "shhhh" or do you entertain their qualms? — Benj96

Of course, what "merit" is, would have to be defined and accepted. What a corntribution is and how valuable it is to society and mankind.

If you were given the choice to walk in God's shoes for a moment — Benj96

Abolish any and all ideas, concepts, histories of gods. Remove all idea of a superior being from the minds of all humans and replace it with the concept of self sufficiency and love for oneself and everyone else including the planet.
Then I would go back to my job of trying to teach common sense to teenagers. :wink:

Lets consider a big hypothetical, a thought experiment for a moment here and see where it leads. — Benj96

OK, sure.

If you were given the choice to walk in God's shoes for a moment (whatever that means to you), if you were suddenly the creator. The start of all - the alpha, the end of all - the omega, and everything in between, what would you do with your time as this entity?

I'd get absolutely shitfaced, and no one could stop me. People would be like: "Hey God, whatsup", and I'd be like "hey dude, I'm high af".

Would you sit back and merely observe? Practice non-interference so to speak. Or would you reveal your true identity? Would you spread your truth? If so who would you tell and why?

What?

I'd make a safe biospheric (biologically self-supporting) bunker that withstands nuclear, chemical, and biological warfare, as well as conventional warfare. I'd make it really cool and nice and spacious inside. I'd also put a piece of paper somewhere where only I can find it, with the winning lottery numbers of 39 countries for their 499 consecutive draws. I would populate the bunker with incredibly beautiful and smart women who find me attractive, and a few incredibly smart and beautiful men, and keep the combination to the entrance of this bunker only to myself. I'd have enough supplies in the bunker to sustain the population there for 2,000,000 years.

I know this is self-serving and egotistical, but so are the actions and decisions of the currently presiding god. If you can believe the scriptures.

In fact, there is a proof somewhere that anything anyone does, is self-serving and egotistical. Those acts of people that contradict this observation, can be shown that they are exchanging something really bad for something not as bad, so they are also self-serving and egotistical.