Is God part of the natural world or the man-made world?
- Natural World
- Man-Made World
- Other (please specify)
0
voters
Is God part of the natural world or the man-made world?
how did this fixation on god come to be? 
Define natural and man-made from your perspective…
God is supranatural by definition.
Is that part of the natural world, man-made world or the non-physical world?
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … 06_003.jpg
"The plurality that we perceive is only an appearance; it is not real: Vedantic philosophy… has sought to clarify it by a number of analogies, one of the most attractive being the many-faceted crystal which, while showing hundreds of little pictures of what is in reality a single existent object, does not really multiply that object… "
Schrodinger The Mystic Vision" as translated in Quantum Questions:
Mystical Writings of the World’s Great Physicists (1984)
What are you looking for, my opinion? Traditionally, there is a spiritual world which goes beyond and yet permeates the natural world. If you want to discuss it you need to offer more information about where you are coming from to make it interesting.
Mutcer"]
IF there is a god or Something that caused all of THIS, then that Something would flow through everything in the universe sort of like a continuum…no beginning nor end…a constant onward flowing…
If there is a god, then how could !!!anything!!! in the universe truly be separate??? As Schrodinger said, it is just the way we perceive things
we human beings like to compartmentalize everything.
If God is supernatural and has direct connection to supernatural occurrences (e.g. Jesus walking on water), then that is without argument part of the physical world. Yet where in our physical world does God reside? Why can’t science detect his presence?
He’s not part of the natural world but he is man made IMO. At face value that makes no sense but there we go. Let’s just say God appears to be just as he should considering man, and that doesn’t bode well for religious scripture.
If God is man-made, where did man manufacture God?
If you had a balancing scale and put the God that man made on one side, how much weight would you have to put on the other side for the scale to balance?
I don’t think Schrödinger put it quite that simply. Everything interacts with everything else in some way and our perceptions are somewhat flawed is probably closer, separate is a matter of degrees of separation. Also instrumentally what we perceive is beholden to what we are and so it is inseparable functionally from what is “seen”. Schrödinger’s 126th to last words were “my only regret is that I will not live to see the death of quantum mechanics”. It’s a noble sentiment particularly in hindsight and particularly when he had to grudgingly accept it did at least appear practical and still does. His vision of determinism and agreeing with Einstein’s “God does not play dice” analogy have changed little since his time, because they don’t appear to work. As Bohr said in reply and rightly so “stop telling God what to do with his dice”. Natural philosophy is really trying to make sense of the nonsensical, it is struggling as is physics. We are limited by being us atm and not having fine enough instruments or fine enough minds or fine enough language to describe the natural world.
And when two compartments are the same such as God not existing or him existing we should remain neutral. But we of course, despite it being logically sound, aren’t lead to think that way, even if probabilistically 1:1 means we should expect either without preference at least in science (the objective) if not faith (the subjective).
In his evolution in the environment and of the mind and in his ascent to civilisation and the needs there of.
The scale is going to balance whether he is man made or he is divinely inspired, there is no distinction between the two. At least none I know. Putting faith on one side of the scale though is no different from using anthropology to explain God, equally they are balanced given what we can know.
I guess I need to clarify what I meant. Where, geographically, did man manufacture God?
Each can be answered with a yes/no
Indoors?
Northern Hemisphere?
Asia?
Europe?
On land?
If God is man-made, then it has mass. The mass of God can be placed on a scale and on the other side of the scale a like amount of weight or mass would have to be placed for the scale to balance.
In the pub? Are you asking me to explain why religion exists? That’s going to take not just all day but all year. God is ubiquitous if not in all cultures in all cultures that have been exposed to him like any meme.
Why is that? Religion says God is not discernible by the minds of man alone, but only through his revelation in scripture which has mass, whether it’s true is another matter. God is not a thing with mass he is something, nothing and anything: a concept. Do thoughts have mass or are they subject to something with mass, and not physically massive per se. Energy has no mass as far as we know, not everything is massive in the Universe. If it starts with the massless thought and ends up in the mass of our minds or memories is it therefore the product of mass or massless energy?
I think the idea is that God has power over the natural world, having preceded it and all. God is considered to be omnipresent. That means God is present everywhere and in everything. Science is only able to detect physical phenomena not spiritual.
What is the man made world?
How does it differ from the natural world?
Before we can answer the question posed in the OP (as i suspect it was meant) we first have to answer the question of whether or not God exists.
so far as i can see this have never been verified.
how would science even know for sure that what they were observing was only physical and not spiritual?
appearances can be deceiving and we know so little of the universe so how do we differentiate between physical phenomena and spiritual. Someone might say that a rainbow is both.
What is unobserved is undefined.
[tangent] Ahem. Energy is mass. [/tangent]
Ok what’s the rest mass of a photon then?