# Selfhood and Religion **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 15, 2005, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/selfhood-and-religion/317066 "2005-08-15T06:02:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![other-wise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/4bbf92/32.png) [@other-wise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/other-wise)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/selfhood-and-religion/317066/41 "2005-08-18T13:57:06Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I’d say that it is more like a cell achieving awareness of other cells. Suppose that, suddenly, you were to become perfectly empathetic with my whole life experience. You have my memories as well as your own. My knowledge as well as yours. You know not only what I’ve done, but why — what led to what. You know what I love and what I hate. You know what I fear and what I desire. And not only do you know these on an intellectual level, but you _understand_ these. It isn’t just that you become knowledgable of my shame in childhood upon hearing jokes about my father, it is that you _have experienced_ that shame. You transcend past, present, and future, just as a 3D man transcends the borders on a circle. This is how it is with God. He knows the hearts of men because He IS we — not as a copula, but as an existential. That is why identity is not lost. I may (or may not) be starting to understand this. At first I was thinking “How could I possible have/know your memories when the molecules that presumably _code_ those memories are scattered to the winds?” But then I realized that that wouldn’t be a concern if I “existed” atemporally; the memories would be just as extant as the scattering. It’s almost as if everyone who values goodness/love above all else is God, but from the context of a temporal frame of reference, can only be said to be _becoming_ God: once they’re God they’ll be in the position of never having _not_ been God. BTW, in your view, do those who do not value goodness/love still gain the uber _perspective_? (And more importantly, is any of the above even remotely close to what you’re talking about?) ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/selfhood-and-religion/317066/42 "2005-08-18T14:28:42Z")
> [@Otherwise](#): > > It’s almost as if everyone who values goodness/love above all else is God, but from the context of a temporal frame of reference, can only be said to be becoming God: once they’re God they’ll be in the position of never having not been God. That is exactly what I’ve been trying to say. From God’s perspective (reference frame), the universe simultaneously has not yet begun, is ongoing, and is finished — all at once. Just like the inside, wall, and outside of the circle may be seen all at the same time by 3D-man. Even Paul understood this: “For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.” — I Corinthians 13:12. > [@](#): > > BTW, in your view, do those who do not value goodness/love still gain the uber perspective? No. But only because they’ve chosen to be cut off from it. It is like the man who stands before a Picasso and declares it to be a piece of junk that a monkey could do. How does he share the perspective of artists who understand Picasso in the context of art history, and value it accordingly? Just as education contributes to the appreciation of Picasso, so does edification contribute to the appreciation of goodness. Owing to its nature, goodness always increases itself. It is the perpetual motion machine of aesthetics. > [@](#): > > (And more importantly, is any of the above even remotely close to what you’re talking about?) It would seem to me that we now share a common understanding. ---
**Author:** ![mojave66](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@mojave66](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mojave66)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/selfhood-and-religion/317066/43 "2005-08-18T15:08:46Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Interesting post . Pardon my ignorance but could you briefly explain the terms I bolded. Sure, my apologies for ofuscating:\* Benevolent Hedonism: A phrase I made up, basically a combination of enlightened self-interest and indulgence in the sensual pleasures of life, but not to the point of being criminal or completely self-absorbed. Randian Objectivism: Ayn Rand’s objectivist philosophy ( [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivist\_philosophy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivist_philosophy) ) Gaianism: Philosophy based on the Gaia hypothesis, which states that the biosphere as a whole is a self-sustaining mechanism ( [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia\_theory\_(science)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_theory_(science)) ) \*(ridiculously pompous word intended as an self-inflicted poke) ---
**Author:** ![other-wise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/4bbf92/32.png) [@other-wise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/other-wise)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/selfhood-and-religion/317066/44 "2005-08-18T17:09:27Z")
**Lib** , I’m having trouble picturing our essential nature as spirit-identical-to-God, and how the creation scenario plays out in all of this. If I remember correctly, your view is that God is creating/has created (or at least, is using/has used) the universe as an ideal mise en scène for free moral beings to grow in. Once these individual beings have “grown” into God, they become what they’ve always been. I’m not clear on why God is (or has), um, “fractionated” Himself into separate free moral beings in the first place. Or has He? Is it more a matter of God leveraging the universe to evolve _more_ God, thus adding to infinity, so to speak? (Forgive the tortured wording; these are not concepts I can express coherently yet). > [@Liberal](#): > > It would seem to me that we now share a common understanding. No, my friend. I have only a “shadow of an inkling” of your understanding, but I’m working on it. ---
**Author:** ![II\_Gyan\_II](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/bbe5ce/32.png) [@II\_Gyan\_II](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/II_Gyan_II)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/selfhood-and-religion/317066/45 "2005-08-18T19:59:38Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Only those who value goodness above all other aesthetics are one with God, because that’s what God values. How do you know? And how do you know that killing is good or bad? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/selfhood-and-religion/317066/46 "2005-08-18T23:53:33Z")
> [@mojave66](#): > > Sure, my apologies for ofuscating:\* > > Benevolent Hedonism: A phrase I made up, basically a combination of enlightened self-interest and indulgence in the sensual pleasures of life, but not to the point of being criminal or completely self-absorbed. > > Randian Objectivism: Ayn Rand’s objectivist philosophy ( [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivist\_philosophy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivist_philosophy) ) > > Gaianism: Philosophy based on the Gaia hypothesis, which states that the biosphere as a whole is a self-sustaining mechanism ( [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia\_theory\_(science)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_theory_(science)) ) > > \*(ridiculously pompous word intended as an self-inflicted poke) 😃 Thanks for the explaination and the laugh. Benevolent Hedonism is a good term. I think I are one. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![II\_Gyan\_II](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/bbe5ce/32.png) [@II\_Gyan\_II](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/II_Gyan_II)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2005, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/selfhood-and-religion/317066/47 "2005-08-21T18:51:52Z")
No one else has thoughts on selfhood and religion? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/selfhood-and-religion/317066.md?page=2)