Yes they are bred from the culture and historical culture.
Yes not everybody is affected the same,
but regardless, to have the foundation of being and thought processes and actions being based from a standing that a fictional character is anything more than fictional, is truly and sadly usually a show of a psychological disorder. Sadly.
Yes those disorders have been very long since propagated, perpetuated, and manipulated / coerced for mass control, power, exploitation, extortion, manipulation and other heinous acts, until it became an unfortunate “Norm” of society.
But that still does not make it something other than what is most seemingly appears to be, a varying myriad of mental disorders being utilized for profit purposes that breed and feed from and off of fear and ignorance.
The “belief” in “god”, is seemingly showing characteristics of a myriad variety of mental disorders and human fallibilities, as i will touch upon in this article.
It would be seeming common sense to learn reality and grow accordingly.
What is “god”?
1. “god/s” as portrayed by religions and mythologies throughout history and unto today, are nothing more than a few thousand fictional characters.
Most religions believe in one or more deities with distinct characteristics. Typically polytheistic religions rank their deities, some being dominant over others. Sometimes the supreme deity started the universe up but is no longer involved in human affairs, therefore lower ranking deities that do things for people may be worshiped more intensively than the supreme “god”.
A deity is a generic description of a divine being such as a “god or a goddess”. In some cases, entire anthropomorphic mythologies are developed about the deities, as in ancient Greek religion – the “gods” have feuds, are born, die, fight and often interact quite directly with mortals in these myths. In other religions, particularly the oldest ones, the “gods” are given more transcendent qualities and are simply representations of concepts such as fertility or natural forces.
As religion developed, the role gods played altered and monotheism developed to replace the pantheons of old. The most widely worshiped god in the present day is confusingly called “god”, and is the monotheist deity of christianity, judaism, bahai, islam, and a handful of other religions, living and extinct. “god” is never referred to as goddess by any of the abrahamic faiths; even when formless or hermaphroditic, like in kabbalah. In islam as in christianity, “god” is called by the speaker’s usual word for “god” (this being “allah” to Arabic-speakers); in judaism, “god” has many names, including (but not limited to) “yhwh,” “jehovah,” and “the great I am.” The zoroastrian “god” is called “ahura mazda”. Not to be confused with “azor ahai aka stannis baratheon” the one true king.
Sometimes rulers become “gods” while they are alive as with the Roman emperor and the Egyptian pharaoh. Other times rulers get promoted to become “gods” after they die.
For deified individuals see List of people who have been considered deities, Apotheosis and Imperial cult. For epithets of “gods” of monotheistic religions, see Names of God. For deities whose cult is fictional see List of deities in fiction.
Here is a link to a list of gods that most theists don’t believe in.
This assumes that people don’t consider these “gods” to be:
- Manifestations of “god’s” partial revelation of Himself to their respective peoples (syncretism), or
- Names given to “angels, djinn, demons, evil spirits, falsehoods of Satan“, or other non-deity-but-still supernatural entities.
This is a good list to parse through if someone brings up Pascal’s Wager, especially that “god” requires one to reject ALL these “gods”.
Not to mention the Anthropomorphism rampant in theological dialogue.
Both have ancient roots as storytelling and artistic devices, and most cultures have traditional fables with anthropomorphized animals as characters. People have also routinely attributed human emotions and behavioural traits to wild as well as domestic animals.
2. “god” described as “existence” can be valid, but then again, why the need to change the word to something even more subjective and abstract as “god” as compared to existence.
Existence, in its most generic terms, comprises the state of being real and the ability to physically interact with the universe or multiverse. What existence is exactly is up for interpretation – and is one of the most important and fundamental topics of ontology, the philosophical study of the nature of being, existence, or reality in general, as well as of the basic categories of being and their relations. Traditionally listed as a part of the major branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, ontology deals with questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist, (for instance: “Does the stellar structure UDFj-39546284 exist?”), and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences.
Materialism holds that the only things that exist are matter and energy, that all things are composed of material, that all actions require energy, and that all phenomena (including consciousness) are the result of material interactions.
Life is a characteristic which distinguishes objects that have self-sustaining biological processes from those that do not—either because such functions have ceased (death), or else because they lack such functions and are classified as “inanimate“.
In mathematics, existence is asserted by a quantifier, the existential quantifier, one of two quantifiers (the other being the universal quantifier). The properties of the existential quantifier are established by axioms.
Stop trying to change perfectly good word, well-defined, objectively verifiable terminology, to shitty subjective and abstract, ill-defined terms that are the cause of millennium of needless death and destruction.
3. “god” described as the “self” can be promoting a delusion of separation between the self and what is considered the self by the self, this is also known as “ego”.
This is why the difference between subjective and abstract terms and objectively verifiable, physically referential must be noted.
This idea of the self as “god” is also promoting a delusion that we are in any way separate from the rest of existence, another abstraction that can also be considered a delusion of separation.
Or as well as being “superior” than that of anything else in this existence, which is also known as a “god complex”, or Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder in which there is a long-term pattern of abnormal behavior characterized by exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, and a lack of understanding of others’ feelings. People affected by it often spend a lot of time thinking about achieving power or success, or about their appearance. They often take advantage of the people around them. The behavior typically begins by early adulthood, and occurs across a variety of situations.The cause of narcissistic personality disorder is unknown. It is a personality disorder classified within cluster B by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
4. “god” described as “love”, well, “love” is just a name we give for a neurosynaptic electro-chemical response we humans have when an external / internal form of stimuli occurs to create such a reaction that makes up what we humans ascribe in english as “love”.
We call it love. It feels like love. But the most exhilarating of all human emotions is probably nature’s beautiful way of keeping the human species alive and reproducing.
With an irresistible cocktail of chemicals, our brain entices us to fall in love. We believe we’re choosing a partner. But we may merely be the happy victims of nature’s lovely plan.
The 3 stages of love
Helen Fisher of Rutgers University in the States has proposed 3 stages of love – lust, attraction and attachment. Each stage might be driven by different hormones and chemicals.
Stage 1: Lust
This is the first stage of love and is driven by the sex hormones testosterone and oestrogen – in both men and women.
Stage 2: Attraction
This is the amazing time when you are truly love-struck and can think of little else. Scientists think that three main neurotransmitters are involved in this stage; adrenaline, dopamine and serotonin.
The initial stages of falling for someone activates your stress response, increasing your blood levels of adrenalin and cortisol. This has the charming effect that when you unexpectedly bump into your new love, you start to sweat, your heart races and your mouth goes dry.
Helen Fisher asked newly ‘love struck’ couples to have their brains examined and discovered they have high levels of the neurotransmitter dopamine. This chemical stimulates ‘desire and reward’ by triggering an intense rush of pleasure. It has the same effect on the brain as taking cocaine!Fisher suggests “couples often show the signs of surging dopamine: increased energy, less need for sleep or food, focused attention and exquisite delight in smallest details of this novel relationship”
And finally, serotonin. One of love’s most important chemicals that may explain why when you’re falling in love, your new lover keeps popping into your thoughts.
Stage 3: Attachment
Attachment is the bond that keeps couples together long enough for them to have and raise children. Scientists think there might be two major hormones involved in this feeling of attachment; oxytocin and vasopressin.
Oxytocin – The cuddle hormone
Oxytocin is a powerful hormone released by men and women during orgasm.
It probably deepens the feelings of attachment and makes couples feel much closer to one another after they have had sex. The theory goes that the more sex a couple has, the deeper their bond becomes.
Oxytocin also seems to help cement the strong bond between mum and baby and is released during childbirth. It is also responsible for a mum’s breast automatically releasing milk at the mere sight or sound of her young baby.
Diane Witt, assistant professor of psychology from New York has showed that if you block the natural release of oxytocin in sheep and rats, they reject their own young.
Conversely, injecting oxytocin into female rats who’ve never had sex, caused them to fawn over another female’s young, nuzzling the pups and protecting them as if they were their own.
Vasopressin is another important hormone in the long-term commitment stage and is released after sex.
Vasopressin (also called anti-diuretic hormone) works with your kidneys to control thirst. Its potential role in long-term relationships was discovered when scientists looked at the prairie vole.
Prairie voles indulge in far more sex than is strictly necessary for the purposes of reproduction. They also – like humans – form fairly stable pair-bonds.
When male prairie voles were given a drug that suppresses the effect of vasopressin, the bond with their partner deteriorated immediately as they lost their devotion and failed to protect their partner from new suitors.
Learn more about The chemistry behind love.
5. “god” described as “consciousness” – ok, so, Consciousness is the state or quality of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself. It has been defined variously in terms of sentience, awareness, qualia, subjectivity, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, the fact that there is something “that it is like” to “have” or “be” it, and the executive control system of the mind.
Consciousness is the brains ability to be aware of and communicate with itself within the context of the confines given within the human limitations.
Panpsychism is a metaphysical concept that all matter is conscious. There are various formulations of the concept, ranging from weaker to stronger versions, usually involving how much “consciousness” different things have. Softer forms of panpsychism may include the position that all matter has the possibility of being conscious or that all matter, while not necessarily being conscious, has some form of “mental properties.” The basic idea of panpsychism is analogous to pantheism, just replace “god” with “consciousness,” so all matter, and by extension, the universe, is conscious. There have been variations on this theme stretching back to ancient times — it is similar to ancient religions based on animism.
Psychologists and neuroscientists, as well as many philosophers of mind, tend to dismiss this idea for a number of reasons. Panpsychism is unfalsifiable because there would be no way to detect if, say, a rock had a conscious experience. In the case of humans or other animals, we can explore consciousness and its relation to neurology through behavioral and anatomical studies. The same does not apply to inert matter. Panpsychism also may be driven by the fallacy of division. That is to say, it assumes that anything that has mental properties (such as a brain) must be made of something else that has mental properties. However, there is already a possible solution to this in the form of emergentism. Much research in cognitive science and related fields in recent years is based on an emergentist view of the mind, which holds that mental states may not totally reduce to physical matter but supervene on matter. Alternatively, reductionist approaches sidestep this problem by denying the mental states, claiming that the mind and brain are identical. Panpsychism has yet to produce fruitful research programs as emergentist and reductionist approaches have. In short, panpsychism may be a solution in search of a problem as it commits a category mistake similar to dualism by presuming consciousness is to be found as part of or a property of matter itself rather than as an abstract notion referring to certain patterns of interaction among matter. Thus, panpsychism tends to live mostly in pure philosophy and woo-related fields.
6. “god” being described as “creator” is also absurd, as we know very well how and why cosmic, chemical and biological evolution work pretty well, yes we do not know everything, and we probably never will, but we do know enough to understand these claims are from historical ignorance.
Learn about how evolution works, plenty of Actual Evidence you can view.
Creationism is a belief that asserts a God or gods created reality (the universe and/or its contents) through divine intervention. This is opposed to the scientific consensus that the universe arose through purely natural processes. As a result, creationism is pseudoscience.
“Creationism” is often used as a synonym of Young Earth creationism, but the two are not identical. Due to the existence of many and varied religious beliefs and due to varied attempts to make creationism into something “scientific”, creationism takes many forms. The two major strains are:
- Old Earth creationists, who believe in deep time for the Universe but may reject evolution, common descent, or deep time specifically for the Earth
- Young Earth creationists, who believe the universe is between 6,000 and 10,000 years old, assert the historical truth of the Bible (including The Fall and a global flood), and almost always reject evolution
Despite intelligent design proponents’ (dishonest) protests, religious faith in the (often literal) truth of holy texts, such as genesis, is the foundation of creationism. Literalism is a tenet shared by fundamentalists and creationists of christianity, judaism, islam, hinduism, and other religions.
Because of the assertion of divine involvement, the many people who agree with science on deep time and evolution but think that a “god” of the gaps created the universe or influenced reality at some crucial instances (e.g. caused the Big Bang or kickstarted abiogenesis) are still creationists under the widest definitions of the term, though they are not usually included under the label and would generally fall under theistic evolution.
Intelligent design creationism (often intelligent design, ID, or IDC) is a pseudoscience that maintains that certain aspects of the physical world, and more specifically life, show signs of having been designed, and hence were designed, by an intelligent being (usually, but not always, the “god” of the christian religion). The concept is older than science, but only since the 1980s has the term “intelligent design” come into circulation. Supporters of intelligent design (termed design proponents, or, once, cdesign proponentsists) usually claim that the theory is not based on Christian creationism, although the existence of the Wedge Document is a pretty big hint that there is some link. It appears to be some form of agnostic creationism, and creationism is inherently religious. Attempts to have ID taught in public schools have been defeated in court, and science papers proposing a “designer” usually cannot get past peer review – although not for reasons of prejudice against the subject matter. Intelligent design has been widely criticised for its failure to state what mechanism drives it, its lack of falsifiability, and many other problems that leave it lacking as a scientific theory. Where it has faced the scrutiny of the law, the US court system (apparently the only one to have considered the question) has appeared to consider it a form of Old-Earth creationism, making its teaching in public schools constitutionally impermissible under the Supreme Court’s holding in Edwards v. Aguillard (1987).
CREATIONISM IS NOT SCIENCE, SAY TOP SCIENTISTS
The National Academy of Sciences declares unequivocally that the tenets of ‘creation science’ are not supported by scientific evidence, that creationism has no place in a science curriculum at any level and that its teaching would be contrary to the nation’s need for a scientifically literate citizenry and for a large, well-informed pool of scientific and technical personnel.
Only the nation’s most distinguished scientists and engineers belong to the National Academy of Sciences. Abraham Lincoln signed its charter, under which the Academy serves as an official advisor, upon request and without fee, to the federal government on any question of science and technology.
In its classic 1984 position paper, Science and Creationism, the Academy explains that the teachings of creationism as advocated by and exemplified in the writings of the leading proponents of ‘creation science’ include the following judgments:
(1) that earth and the universe are relatively young, perhaps only 6,000 to 10,000 years old;
(2) the present physical form of the earth can be explained by catastrophism, including a worldwide flood; and
(3) all living things (including humans) were created miraculously, essentially in the forms we now find them.
These teachings may be recognized as having been derived from the accounts of origins in the first two chapters of Genesis in the Bible.I
The hypothesis of special creation has, over nearly two centuries, been repeatedly and sympathetically considered and rejected on evidential grounds by qualified observers and experimentalists. In the forms given in the first two chapters of Genesis, it is now an invalidated hypothesis. To reintroduce it into the schools at this time as an element of science teaching would be akin to requiring the teaching of Ptolemaic astronomy or pre-Columbian geography.
Science and Creationism explains why creationism cannot be regarded as a scientific pursuit. The claim that equity demands ‘balanced treatment’ of the two in the same classroom reflects misunderstanding of what science is and how it is conducted.
Scientific investigators seek to understand natural phenomena by direct observation and experiment. Scientific interpretations of facts are always provisional and must be testable. Statements made by authority, revelation, or appeal to the supernatural are not germane to this process in the absence of supporting evidence.
In creationism both authority and revelation take precedence over evidence. The conclusions of creationism do not change, nor can they be validated when subjected to test by the methods of science. Thus there are profound differences between the religious belief in special creation and the scientific explanations embodied in evolutionary theory.
Truly scientific understanding cannot be attained or even pursued effectively when explanations not derived from or tested by the scientific method are accepted.
The Academy concludes, “No body of beliefs that has its origin in doctrinal material rather than scientific observation should be admissible as science in any science course.”
“Incorporating the teaching of such doctrines into a science curriculum stifles the development of critical thinking patterns in the developing mind and seriously compromises the best interests of public education. This could eventually hamper the advancement of science and technology as students take their places as leaders of future generations.”
You can read or photocopy the complete Science and Creationism, only 28 pages at the Rush Rees and Carlson libraries of the University of Rochester. Its call number is QH371 S398 1984. To carry the work home, you must either (1) make an interlibrary loan through the Monroe County Library System or (2) have a connection with the university.You can order ‘Science and Creationism’ for $5.00 from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20418. You can order it for $4.00 from the Press website (http://www.nap.edu/).
The idea of creationism also brings into effect the creation paradox, “who created the creator”?
Christopher Hitchens had a wonderful repose to that:
”…The postulate of a designer or creator only raises the unanswerable question of who designed the designer or created the creator. Religion and theology… have consistently failed to overcome this objection.”
After years of looking into this subject, I still do not know what “god” is or what the word is representative of, as i have yet to be given a valid or even rational explanation of the term.
The “meaning of life” is easy to explain as well, here:
Anything in existence has as far as we can tell with our limited human minds, one single purpose if it even is a purpose, to Survive through Nourishment.
This applies to Everything in existence, as if it was not self nourishing in whatever means necessary for that specific existence it would not survive.
Stars, galaxies, life on earth, life elsewhere, pretty simple shit, Survival Through Nourishment.
And again, the propagation and perpetuation of what can otherwise be construed as a myriad variation of psychological disorders, mostly for profit and/or fear / ignorance, is not something that is going to help our species advance in any way, as has been shown throughout history.
It is also necessary to point out that religions are Not people.
Religions are institutions of oppression that victimize whole populations for continued exploitation and extortion, and this racket has been working very well by utilizing psychological manipulative factors, as well as fighting to keep fear and ignorance their foundation of worship.
It is right now 2017, we as humans know and understand the difference between Fact and Fiction.
Theology is mostly made up of Fiction, this being the case, the institutions of oppression that propagate and perpetuate a myriad of mental disorders for the profit of a few, would be otherwise in any rational sense considered a very severe oppression upon the people of earth, albeit one that has somehow lasted a few millennium.
Mental disorders can be very easy to instill and manipulate if one knows how to do so.
And when for many generations, these issues have been turned into a modus operandi for most of our species cultures, the negative systemic effects of this action, can be easily observed in society.
Oppression is exuded by most religions on this planet. They do nothing but exploit and extort people, there is no need for them. They promote very severe mental disorders for their own profit. They have spent Millennium violently forcing their insane and idiotic fear and ignorance based ideologies upon the people of this planet, so much so in fact, that a majority of people are now afflicted with very severe mental issues due to hyper-religiosity:
Hyper-religiousity/Hyper-religiosity/Hyperreligiosity/Hyperreligiousity — Identifying and Overcoming Patterns of Religious Dysfunction .
Just to name a few:
- Stockholm syndrome.
Persecutory delusional syndrome.
Messiah / god complex.
Acute Stress Disorder
Drug / Alcohol Dependence
Schizophrenia & Other Psychotic Disorders
Schizotypal Personality Disorder
Separation Anxiety Disorder
Shared Psychotic Disorder
Antisocial Personality Disorder
Avoidant Personality Disorder
Bipolar Disorder (Manic Depression)
Borderline Personality Disorder
Brief Psychotic Disorder
Dependent Personality Disorder
Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Histrionic Personality Disorder
Major Depressive Disorder
Narcissistic Personality Disorder
Oppositional Defiant Disorder
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
I can keep going, but i hope you can understand the point of why and how all religion is a major cognitive and intellectual hindrance and detriment to our species mental health, which most certainly affects greatly, our psyche, and thus our physiological being, and more importantly our exuded behavioural characteristics, especially within a society.
Hyper-religiosity is classified as a mental disorder, we should begin to oppose this disorder as we do with any other, with effective and proven solutions.
Religiosity and mental health. – PubMed – NCBI
I have not really even brought up any of the physical extreme violence of ALL religions, which for Millennia has plagued our species, you can very easily look into Religious Violence, as well as the History of every single theology out there, and you will very easily come to understand the amount of Harm these institutions of oppression have caused humans and our ecosystem.
Very simply: Nothing “good” has Ever come from Any religion, ever, only “Extreme Bad”.
Religious violence – Wikipedia
So, please understand that when we are talking about Religion / Theology, we are in no way describing any Person who Ascribes to such oppression, as they are but a victim of culture (as we all are), but the Institution of oppression that propagates and perpetuates these oppressive actions.
Of which as it were as well, under capitalism and theocratic based ruler-ship, the cultures that have evolved from these oppressive societal constructs have Provable and Obviously been a detriment to not only our species, but the entire ecosystem.
We can only hope that we as a species begin to understand the detriment and harm of oppressive societal constructs and work towards the rendering of them obsolete.
And that is what we are about, so please visit our website [www.ThinkandAct.Earth] to learn some of the steps and processes anybody, anywhere can take to implement “freeing systems” into one’s life and thus potentially disengaging from total reliance upon oppression for survival and thrivability..
Theology is a plague to humanity.