To every thing, turn, turn. Who am I?

After more than six years of chewing on it, I’m looking forward to demoting my “Who Am I?” project to the way back burner and starting in on another one who's time has come. 

This Stephen Gould’s Missing Key, morphed into Is Belief In God Rational?, morphed into Who Am I? project was edifying and humbling, and yeah, I’m afraid disappointing.  I’m a born and bred child of the intellectual enlightenment, with engaged discussion in my DNA.  Seems that I may belong in a different world and time and with goals that make no sense to the current implosion into that MAGA, me, me, me, dog eat dog reality making the rounds.  

Thing is, I grew up in a home with table talk, and magazines like Popular Science and Popular Mechanics, National Geographic, two encyclopedia sets, the big Webster Dictionary that needed it’s own stand, plus …, all that in a narrow ground level Chicago apartment with eclectic parents who were curious about the world, plus two sisters, an older brother with an engineer’s mind, turned jet engine mechanic and ultimately retiring as 737 pilot.  But, I digress.  

After my latest frustrating round with the philosophy club, I’m sharing an email I sent to an eminent neuroscientist that I swapped some emails with a couple years back.  I’m sharing his response followed by some more explanatory notes.  

The Democratic Party online Forum. To help inform and build community. It's worth a try.

Democratic Party leaders how will you start reconnecting with alienated voters whose budgets won’t allow for constant political donations?

Oh if wishes were horses and I had tons of money, then someone at Democratic headquarters would listen to this suggestion.  We could talk it around until a big wig decides to take the idea for themself and make it happen. Politics at its best.
Now it’s the proverbial, … never mind.  Now, if you think it's a good idea, pass it along.

DNC’s never ending assault of political donation demands have become counter productive. We need ideas and community and encouragement.

What’s worse is the melodrama, rarely do those Democrat texts communicate any constructive information or reason to engage.

We need substantive helpful information. We need something with teeth that engages.

One suggestion, why not a private Democratic online discussion forum.   The DNC could communicate directly with really interested voters; interested motivated Democrats could virtually meet and brainstorm and engage and network with likeminded.

Give us something to help build a little tangible feelings of solidarity.

"I Am, Therefore I Think" - A scientific reality. What does it mean? (a dialogue)

 

I received the following constructive response to some of my thoughts and have decided to share this latest effort to clarify my Earth Centrist perspective. 

Hi, Peter,

Many theists believe in evolution, viewing it as god’s means of creating humans, so evolution is a bit of a red herring in this debate.  We do have the concept of god in our minds, but that tells us nothing about whether there is a god or not.  We have the concepts of trees and unicorns; the former exist, the latter don’t.  We need further argumentation to make a case for or against god’s existence.

Regards,

Thank you for responding and engaging with my ideas.  

Your note invites some clarification.

This isn’t about lip service to evolution.

This is about our relationship with the thoughts we possess.

This is about taking Descartes' (pre-scientific) reduction of what we can known about the human condition, which he boiled down to: "I Think, Therefore I Am” - to a modern scientifically informed reduction of our actual human condition: "I Am, Therefore I Think."

We are evolved biological sensing creatures, product of a half billion years of Earth’s evolution - what that tells us is that our mind is produced by our body/brain interacting with the world.  (Solms, Damasio, Sapolsky, etc.)

This brings us to a realization that it isn't a question of whether Gods are real or not. 

It is about appreciating that God's are the product of our own human thoughts.

Meta-physical figments within our minds - outside the realm of physical world.

You write: "We do have the concept of god in our minds" - but that is exactly what begs the question: "How does an assumption of God become a Being of God?"