Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

God is dead, and we have killed him.

God is dead, and we have killed him.
June 18, 2009, 06:58:02 AM
Now we must ask:

(a) Do we need a replacement?
(b) If so, what?

The humanists/liberals suggest we replace God with progressive dogma. Even as you're being sodomized by invading Mongols or Berbers, you can congratulate yourself on doing the right thing. Sounds like cognitive dissonance to me.

Conservatives tend to not want to give up sacralization, at the very least, so they idealize the organic. Family, culture, community. They do not require a separate layer of thought about life in order to live life; they try to meld with the nature of reality and live through that.

New age religions (Scientology, Satanism, etc) try to introduce a materialist pseudogod with progressive overtones. See humanists/liberals.

Fatalists want to revel in nothingness, which is a way of maintaining their shock at it. They are afraid to go on because they fundamentally do not believe life is worth living and would choose not to live if given the chance again.

Nihilists (active nihilists like myself) are interested in moving past the knowledge that nothing matters but what we value, and that we're alone in the universe and captains of our own fate. We tend to either sacralize life, or sacralize thought, or both.

I'm sure there are other methods too but these are the main ones I've seen.

Re: God is dead, and we have killed him.
June 20, 2009, 08:34:32 AM

Triumph of the self. In the end, this realization [the topic] comes from a Nietzschean context, and that reminds me of the example of Napoleon, whose history is also the history of: "the supreme happiness this century [the XIXth] has attained through its men of valour and its moments of brilliance."
Indeed, this man brought the death of millions, massive changes throughout Europe and an astounding legacy of the glory one man can achieve, wholly through the powers of ambition and self-confidence. He believed in nothing but himself.
Once nihilism has become the default philosophical stance, there can be little room for sacredness (perhaps only somehow ironically, as a recognition of a higher state of being and acting, but definetly not upholding it as an absolute), in my opinion, but - once the fatalistic stance has been overcome - there is the possibility of endless exploration of the ideals and mental designs we can apply to the environment we interact with, through eugenics, art, philosophy, science etc....
Fuck God, fuck sacredness, onward to new battles and human evolution through "aristeia" (excellence). After all, Nietzsche admits one of his conclusions holds that the "real man represents a much higher value than the "desirable" man in one or another of the known ideals" [...] "that the ideal has been until now precisely the disparaging force of man and universe, the poisonous breath onto reality, the great temptation of nothingness..."

If I'm missing the point of the topic, then may I ask, what does God represent that has died and should be replaced? From the beginning I supposed that this was a question of ideals.

Re: God is dead, and we have killed him.
June 20, 2009, 03:46:02 PM
If I'm missing the point of the topic, then may I ask, what does God represent that has died and should be replaced?

You're asking exactly the right question. Jehovah is compost, but having a god remains. So, what's our god now? I believe you've answered it in your post: our own selves. The reason why the results radically differ from what your alternate future description suggests is that each person involved is really not of Napoleonic or Nietzschean quality individually. They're rather average at best. We can observe the modern world, with every humanzee fantasizing that he is important and capable (he isn't), with himself his only god. Put mildly, the results are disappointing with very few exceptions.

Re: God is dead, and we have killed him.
June 22, 2009, 09:55:11 PM
In many ways, God is an analogue for our self-awareness, and now we need to put God back into the world so we can be aware not of ourselves but of the world containing ourselves.

Re: God is dead, and we have killed him.
June 23, 2009, 06:39:56 AM
If I'm understanding accurately, we are naturally driven to understand ourselves. The best way to do so is in a holistic manner by including the context/world/reality where we find ourselves. Perhaps there is a heirarchy of understanding ourselves, much like that heirarchy of religious belief systems.

1. holistic, non-anthropocentric = non-modern or traditional thinking
2. holistic, anthropocentric = smarter lefty moderns and Judeo-Christians
3. atomized, anthropocentric = average modern person
4. comatose or mentally retarded

Re: God is dead, and we have killed him.
June 23, 2009, 07:51:54 AM
Category 2 is the "civic religion of multiculturalism and antifascism" commonplace in this hemisphere.

Re: God is dead, and we have killed him.
June 27, 2009, 06:12:21 PM
I think it's interesting how even on this forum, the really big ideas that are challenging get ignored.

Like this one; it's a hard chew.

To my mind, we should develop more of a sacred outlook toward life, and if religion does that, fine. Put a roomful of geniuses to work on Christianity and you'll get a better form of Christianity. Yes, let them edit the Bible. Put out a new edition every twenty years and offer cash to buyback the old ones.

The masses will never know -- because they don't really care. They're glorified orangutans.