G.O.D.’s health warning



The pantheist’s1 inference2:


For ‘god’ (Greek theos) experience3: a constraint applying as a rule.4


For ‘G.O.D.’5 (writ large) infer: the rule of rules set, meaning: a common rules set from which all uncommon6 rules sets emerge.7


For ‘g.o.d.’ (writ small) experience: a differentiation of the rule of rules sets.8


For ‘set’ read: a selection, hence group ≈ eco of rules.


A constraint (i.e. a rule, i.e. as G.O.D. or as its differential copy, i.e. g.o.d.) demands compliance ‘or else’.9 Non-compliance results in elimination.













©  2018 by Victor Langheld












1.  A pantheist (i.e. an ‘all is god’ believer) is someone (i.e. an ecological system ≈ an eco) who complies with and so applies the survival rules common, i.e. natural, to all (ecos). For ‘eco’ read: an identifiable reality, i.e. an ecological system. For ‘pan’ read: ALL identifiable realities. For ‘common’ read: general, universal.

2.  Since the 21st century pantheist’s actual world (or universe) happens as iconic simulation (of externally accessed, i.e. touched by Big Data) in her brain, hence as a virtual reality, that simulation can only ever be a severely limited and skewed inference about the source of the BIG Data and its self-ordering and self-organisation rules (i.e. G.O.D.), albeit accepted (i.e. verified) as (personally ≈ locally) true by subsequent inference confirming data. In short, true is what is personally confirmed, i.e. reality tested and so personally verified.

3.  Identifiable realities, hence the and all worlds, emerge because the unidentified substrate or ground (quanta) interacts via contact, meaning touch. In other words, all identifiable realities, i.e. all ecos as surface structures, emerge as touch screens that ‘(re-)play’ processed previous contact/touch sequences (self-simulated as knowledge). Hence a contact/touch, i.e. a moment of absolute realness, is self-defined as a quantum of knowledge (Latin scientia), to wit, ‘I know because I’ve experienced (i.e. been touched).’ That all worlds happen as iconic displays of (Big Data) touch sequences was clearly understood 2500 years ago by the Shakyamuni Buddha who declared that: ‘Consciousness (and the other 4 aggregates) arises from contact.’

4.  A ‘constraint applying as a rule’ serves as an order (or command). A constraint, as contact, blocks, stops and so makes real. A series (or set) of constraints/rules emerge as identity.

5.  The modern pantheist understands the word ‘God’ as an acronym, i.e. as G.O.D., standing for ‘General Ordering Device.’ For ‘general’ read: common, equivalent (≈) to universal. Pantheists (like henotheists ≈ ecotheists) may or may not anthropomorphise, indeed personalise their notion of G.O.D., depending on (personal or popular) need.

6.  For ‘uncommon’ read: specifically limited, meaning particular or differential, thus (uncommon) local, hence niche application (≈ enforcement or implementation). For instance, the rules of a game are common. The rules as applied differentially during an actual game are uncommon. All humans have, in principle, a common architecture. Each individual human has an uncommon because differential application thereof.

7.  The common rules set (i.e. G.O.D.) can only be inferred (i.e. abstracted weakly) from actual, hence uncommon applications as local (i.e. g.o.d) rules sets. In other words, the common rules of football can only be inferred (i.e. abstracted) from an actual football game, the inference being ‘strengthened, hardened’ towards truth/fact by statistically significant numbers. The common rules of games (i.e. of fantasies, religious or otherwise) and their emerging affects, as such, i.e. of gaming as such, can also be (weakly) inferred (i.e. abstracted) from an actual game of football or from any actual or virtual (i.e. imaginary) game, In ancient Indian and Chinese times the relationship between the rule of rules, i.e. the basic operating system of rules, and the differential rules emerging during local implementation was verbalised as: ‘Thou art THAT’ or as ‘The suchness of this’ness.’ Hence pantheists experience G.O.D. (i.e. theos) in the common (i.e. the ordinary as ground) and henotheists ( ≈ ecotheists) in the uncommon (i.e. in the ‘stars’above.)

8.  i.e. ‘g.o.d’ as local application running, as differential, albeit wholly recursive G.O.D. copy, on the basic ordering operating system (i.e. G.O.D.).

9.  Hence all rules/constraints serve not as commands but as health warnings, meaning, as in Genesis2: 16&17 : ‘Don’t do this or you will die.’ Since the next most efficient survival-as-continuance step is unpredictable, ‘mortal combat’ (i.e. competition) decides the compliant, i.e. the (Darwinian, hence nature’s ≈ G.O.D.’s) fittest/best (as local g.o.d) as local G.O.D upgrades and the next step.