Futureman? Omnisoul

Futureman can I have the link to your definition of the omnisoul? I constantly see you mention it, but haven’t seen the definition of it, no doubt you’ve explained it on here a few times. I’m just interested.

http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=142330

its buried deeply in there, along with most of its implications and misunderstandings. the first one is in some random thread i dont know where.

ive kinda ditched the idea of us being a part of a collective soul, i basically just tacked it on as a possible explanation for why we should be training to be selfless.

thats the real big thing about the theory, selfless action is the goal, not getting into heaven or living in happiness. my god doesnt care if people are happy, i mean obviously whoever made this universe doesnt care enough to solve all our problems, so either he is weak, doesnt exist, or wants those problems there for a reason.

there is only one motivation i can think of that correlates with gods interaction with human evolution. that is to do selfless actions. gods goal is not to create a harmonious society on earth, but that is clearly the goal of humans. god made the universe so that a harmonious society on earth is verifiably greater than the sum of its parts. god is constantly getting in the way of this goal so that some small portion of humanity is doing completely selfless action in order to put this dream utopia into place.

i believe people who act selfishly when they dont need to, at the expense of others, they arent actually real people. maybe they have souls, but god zapped them some child molestation or something that makes them fundamentally different from me and quakers, because they are fundamentally different. i find it easy to believe that if it werent for natural disasters and psychological instability, human society would have been harmonious from day one.

if a christian god really wanted that to happen, he would have made a world with african bush like infinite resources covering the whole planet, no natural disasters, he would have made it impossible to have more than two children per family (population growth even ruins a utopia) and he should have made our brains less susceptible to psychosis. he didnt do that stuff, therefore HIS goal is not human utopia.

christians talk about gods divine plan and how we arent supposed to know why tsunamis happen. well i do know. god wants there to be the unlucky people who need selfless donations, they are a neccesary part of the machine, because the machine is designed to create people who act selflessly. or acting selflessly causes some kind of meta-byproduct, thats the theory in a nutshell.

the original idea was that the omnisoul ‘existed before the universe’ and was composed of our souls, like our body is composed of cells. something happened to those cells so that they didnt work in harmony anymore, something made them want to work for themselves instead of the collective. god made us so that we are also composed of harmonious cells as a little allegory for this. but what he definetely, without a doubt showed us is that the best way to live in any kind of society is harmoniously.

for some awful reason, society is not harmonious. for all of history it has not been harmonious. in order for it to be perfect like that, some people need to sacrifice things that they feel are owed to them. well i dont feel like i am owed the stuff ill get, but the main attitude around this country is that if youre rich, its because you earned it. thats a stupid shitty thing to think, but i believe god had a hand in creating it.

the certainty that i base my theory on is that whatever made the universe made it so that the golden rule is the way all should live, and whoever made this put a system in place taht is constantly hampering this goal.

also, another main point of the theory is that it is unfalsifiable, as any theory of god will be. the thing that makes mine great is that my god wants to remain unverified. if we all knew for sure that a guy is waiting for us in the sky, then we would all defientely be selfless. not only would the world would quickly become harmonious, and truly selfless action would no longer be needed except in the case of natural disasters, but the actions cease to be truly selfless, since verifiably making god happy benefits us selfishly. god doesnt want human happiness, he wants truly selfless actions.

its hard to fully swallow the idea that god puts fake people on the planet in order to mess with it and only a select few are truly expected to accomplish the goal, but in my opinion its much more hard to swallow any other theory about the nature of god.

you should put the word omnisoul in the title so people can read the new summary.

Hi again Future Man.

May I say, your ethics seems to have too great a dichotomy between happiness and non-selfishness. Probably my fault for not contributing to the thread on the topic. What I should have said there is that, happiness is found in maturity (for Aristotle), and that as people become more mature they are more able to share themselves with others. Take a family man who starts in quasi-lust and ends in sacrificing for his children.

On the other hand, I don’t know if Communists are happier than Capitalists for being forced, not advocated, to be selfless.

And if God didn’t want us to be happy, why did he create us with a desire for Happiness?

Regards,
my real name

he made it possible for us to be happy so that those of us who are rich and able to donate are able to see our own happiness and compare it to the happiness of the poor. if more food didnt make you ‘happy’, then starving isnt something that needs to remedied by my selfless actions.

if it werent for happiness, there would be no verifiable goal for humanity, and gods mission would have to be delivered in writing, which as most of us know is subject to interpretation and exploitation.

the harmonious society isnt a goal if theres no way to be happy. actually there are no goals at all if theres no happiness.

the only thing that i would demand that people do in order to help themselves is to raise their kids as best they can, unfairly with lots of money whatever, thats the system we are in. but once those kids are grown up and financially secure, then all efforts should still be aimed at donating selflessly to other people.

i have no clue, but i would say with 90% certainty that all mid life crises are caused by men who have no mission in life any more. their kids dont want their help and they are working for apparently no reason. i think when people retire, a mid life crisis can be avoided by continuing to put smiles on faces, even if they arent your kids. it should feel just as good.

Thank you for replying. First of I totally agree with your idea about being selfless. As you’ve seen on this board, I am strongly influenced, and have adopted much of Krishnamurti’s views on life, and being selfless is probably the most underlying idea within krishnamurti’s philosophy. It is the only way that I can see for society to be harmonious as you’ve said.

What I have problems with is accepting or creating any kind of god figure, since it immidiatley creates seperation. To me being selfless means to be one, to be whole. The self is an idea, an illusion, and it creates conflict, and seperation. We think that this is what we are, this self image, and that it is the most important, but really it is just image, and thought which dulls our awareness of the present moment. Most people live in they’re heads, we’ve been conditioned to do so.

So to be one, and to enter a god into the equation creates seperation. Just for a short example; say I’m suffering now. I am in great pain(I’m mainly talking about psychological pain here). I don’t know how to deal with this pain, but I believe in god. My belief tells me that there is this higher power, and that I will go to heaven one day and everything will be all gravy and roses, OR I say that god gave me this pain, it is his will. So I don’t look at the pain for what it actually is, I don’t deal with it fully and totally, I don’t put all my attention towards it, and find out if I can rid myself of it now, I say to myself that this is god’s will, I am suffering due to gods will, and my suffering will end one day. So I don’t face the pain, I don’t look at it, I look away from it and to my image of a god.

As for they’re being “fake people”… I don’t know… what I see is strongly affected people… affected by society, by the trends, by what they’ve accepted. So theres no individuality.

Anyways thanks for replying, its really late here, and have to work in the mourning, so sorry if I didn’t address every point of your theory.

thank you for giving me an opportunity to hear my wonderful voice.

i would say irrationally saying ‘this is the will of god, thank you sir may i have another’ for comfort is just fine as long as you somehow actually do manage to deal with your problem as much as you can. wringing your hands for 7 hours because your family is on an airplane or you got dumped and you dont know why is only going to hurt you. saying whatever happens should have happened might not make rational sense, but (i guess that…) it would help someone deal with it more than increasing their blood pressure will.

but youre really right, having god as the ruler of the earth, zapping miracles for the faithful and miraculously enlightening all those who ask for it is not what anybody should believe. its this attitude that creates illogical fundamentalism. my view on those kinds of moral decisions is almost like hedonism. whatever makes the most people happy for the longest time, in a balanced way, thats the morally correct decision.