Could "this" be refered to as *God*?

OK here goes. A brain might have initially just grown neurons. Then when it gradually learned to recognize that a thought might give it power or freedom it would grow that way. Thinking that way overwhelmed random neuron formation and the shrewdest thoughts of recognizing and learning power and freedom formed. Could the set of the most potent neurons, even if in multiple animals, even if on different stages of life we consider sentient, be "God"? It would not be all powerful, have an inside track to the Universe, maybe not even love, but would it be worthy of "worship" or seeking?

Why call those neurons God?
What is the definition for God which attrbute to neurons?
What does "have an inside track to the Universe" means?
What does "worship and seeking neurons" means?
What is the definition for worship and seeking using at here?

robocop (actually) said:

OK here goes. A brain might have initially just grown neurons. Then when it gradually learned to recognize that a thought might give it power or freedom it would grow that way. Thinking that way overwhelmed random neuron formation and the shrewdest thoughts of recognizing and learning power and freedom formed. Could the set of the most potent neurons, even if in multiple animals, even if on different stages of life we consider sentient, be "God"?

Click to expand...

You can call anything God if you feel like it, of course.

I am not sure what you mean by "most potent neurons". Neurons are rather simple individually, and I think you may be projecting into them attributes that they can't really sustain.

For instance, maybe you mean neurons that fire particularly often? But that would make little sense, and also mean that an epileptic attack literally makes a person "more divine" while it happens, if I understood you correctly.

It would not be all powerful, have an inside track to the Universe, maybe not even love, but would it be worthy of "worship" or seeking?

Click to expand...

IMO? Not at all. Far too materialistic and far too limited. It is not even a particularly impressive neurological entity.

It would be more reasonable to adopt a traditional pantheistic or deistic view instead.

Those neurons or cells or those brains might be the most powerful bunch around, even though they don't control the Universe like "God" supposedly would. Trying to find or be like them would be like trying to gain power or freedom, in other words like "God" since "God" can be defined as "as powerful/free as we could get."

I don't mean neurons that fire most often, but those that represent the most "advanced" concept, the most advanced concept leading to power or freedom.

How can you tell a powerful neuron from a run-of-the-mill one?

robocop (actually) said:

OK here goes. A brain might have initially just grown neurons. Then when it gradually learned to recognize that a thought might give it power or freedom it would grow that way. Thinking that way overwhelmed random neuron formation and the shrewdest thoughts of recognizing and learning power and freedom formed. Could the set of the most potent neurons, even if in multiple animals, even if on different stages of life we consider sentient, be "God"? It would not be all powerful, have an inside track to the Universe, maybe not even love, but would it be worthy of "worship" or seeking?

Click to expand...

Personally, I'd ****can this mess of word salad.

I am always learning, starting out behind but persevering for a long time. If you don't like my starting statement, how about my next statement huh?

robocop (actually) said:

Those neurons or cells or those brains might be the most powerful bunch around, even though they don't control the Universe like "God" supposedly would. Trying to find or be like them would be like trying to gain power or freedom, in other words like "God" since "God" can be defined as "as powerful/free as we could get."

I don't mean neurons that fire most often, but those that represent the most "advanced" concept, the most advanced concept leading to power or freedom.

Click to expand...

Luis Dantas: you are asking the same question I am. Once scientists found one neuron that distinguished between a fire hydrant and a red dog. Continue from there with groups of neurons and what they can become.

What is the benefit you can get by labeling neurons as God and worship/seeking Neurons God?

If there is benefit worth it enough to label neurons as God and worship/seeking Neurons God, it should be okay to do so. But personally i don't see there is any benefit which worth it enough for me to do so.

I will try to think about it carefully to see if I can give you a good answer.

Everyone's brain works differently. The basic idea is that when humans vie to survive, those who recognize learning to produce freedom/survival/power are the ones that win out. Still today, eventually a bad decision maker dies and a good one lives. I just wanted to study what makes people learn their lessons best while alive to succeed. Then I think it would be worthy of copying.

And then, there's even a little mythology to my question. Can we identify the very best of it?

Okay, it can be label as God, anyone is okay to do so but i personally don't do so.

What others have said- why call that god?

This vaguely reminds me of some idea of some collective unconscious mind. I guess one could call that god, but for the religious atheist labels like god shouldn't be important IMO but more as a convenient tool of language; a misnomer.

I'm partly composing this post in response to your religion being listed as "atheist still seeking religious experience" as I think it gives your topic a context.

IMO all it really takes is a skeptical attitude and a rejection of supernaturalism while (perhaps) sometimes accepting gods as useful symbols, masks, archetypes or labels. One might desire to be close to, or emulate these personifications but they will distinguish themselves from theists by their rejection of the belief in these personas as nonfictional. In my view gods exist, they are just fictional. But that doesn't lessen their power (if you are interested I can give a metaphor for this). .. but my advice would be to find out what is important to you... what you value, not just ethically but as something you just enjoy/value.

As far as some group consciousness, that might be considered god in some more new agey circles. It kind of reminds me of some misunderstandings of universal consciousness that exists in some forms of Hinduism. In that it isn't the sum of all consciousness but rather the eternal unchanging foundation of reality which is believed to be impersonal and pure consciousness. This view is pretty atheist-friendly as many atheist hindus will attest. But I wouldn't see that "god-like" universal property as "consciousness" although I think it would experienced like that.

That's all I can really say/make of this topic :/

robocop (actually) said:

Luis Dantas: you are asking the same question I am.

Click to expand...

No, I am not. Or at least I don't think the question is inherently meaningful, while you present it as such in the OP.

The idea that there is some sort of meaningful scale of power that may be used to distinguish neurons is, AFAIK, unsupported by current knowledge.

It seems to me that it is just a projection of meaning into the nervous system.

Once scientists found one neuron that distinguished between a fire hydrant and a red dog. Continue from there with groups of neurons and what they can become.

Click to expand...

I don't think neurons work that way.

Alright thanks for the help everybody. Sorry I couldn't find the fire hydrant/red dog article. I was aiming for the best thoughts that could come out of neurons.

robocop (actually) said:

OK here goes. A brain might have initially just grown neurons. Then when it gradually learned to recognize that a thought might give it power or freedom it would grow that way. Thinking that way overwhelmed random neuron formation and the shrewdest thoughts of recognizing and learning power and freedom formed. Could the set of the most potent neurons, even if in multiple animals, even if on different stages of life we consider sentient, be "God"? It would not be all powerful, have an inside track to the Universe, maybe not even love, but would it be worthy of "worship" or seeking?

Click to expand...

This reminds of the concept that there was a singularity, conscious and was all that existed. A singular identity, alone. Than this singularity decided to have an experience and "exploded" itself into what we call the universe today for the sole sake of experiencing itself beyond it's singular nature. This is something my brother and I, he a devout Christian of all things and myself an atheist, talked about. Than Scott Adams came along with something similar and then I found that the concept that a sole consciousness would expand and dissolve itself into sub-conscious states for the sake of the experience of such an action.........

I think you should read Asimov's "The Last Question". You would enjoy it.

But I have to say no.....to your original question.

Unfathomable Tao said:

What others have said- why call that god?

Click to expand...

Pudding said:

Okay, it can be label as God, anyone is okay to do so but i personally don't do so.

Click to expand...

Me either. I don't see the term as accommodating in any fashion unless your implying "mystery". Even so, I'd just stick with that.