Chapter 106: Philosophy and Global Religious Pluralism

Abstract: the question of bringing together all the gods and religions has proved fruitless to date, but a new approach through an expanded philosophy shows how it can be done. This view puts all religions into a fractal perspective [with evolution] and shows how religions evolved, and that all religions fulfilled their purpose and are merely various views of one supreme being [that defies relativity] at different stages of our development. In other words, God is not only a Trinity [of concepts], but is a summation of all the possible forms [contexts] that have been worshipped throughout evolution. Further, religion, the state organisation, social intercourse, art etc. arose as the energy consumed by our brain rose as our lives became more complicated over evolutionary time.

The question of the generality over time and the specifics of a time [an orthogonality] is an integral part of the historical landscape of civilisation, and, I believe, history increases our understanding of why decisions were made and even more importantly how we can make the proper decisions in the future. I have never been greatly interested in history, but given the simplicity of the creation equation, historical events could/would be motivated in an underlying similar way. This view is especially relevant where enigmas and unexplainable occurrences occur in different countries over the whole world and there does appear to be conclusions that can be drawn using organisational physics and in particular orthogonality. If, as I believe, orthogonality/relativity is so basic to the physical universe, it should be apparent and explain the oddities of civilisation

These oddities are enigmatic as they stand alone, but make sense when taken as a concept converted to all contexts. It is obvious that an organisation is only an organisation if every minute part is entangled and in communication and that is why our universe appears as a probability space [1=(a+b), sum of all concepts] and as concepts are orthogonal, but equal, a concept is equal to the sum of all contexts. This might seem trivial, but it could be thought of as a theorem in the mathematics of concept/context because this explains the current enigma of why the mathematical constants [pi, i, e etc.] can be expressed as infinite series. It also says that a piece of energy [photon, value of energy etc.] can be used in an infinite/all ways and that an organisation can be considered as the sum of all organisations.

From the creation equation [(1+(-1))=0] energy and organisation are necessarily equivalent [but opposite/independent yet entangled and only exist in time if they are kept separate, which means an expanding universe, for simplicity] and we see this in the organisation of leader/governor/king and the hierarchy of citizens of the tribe/city/state that matches the energy of living by the populous It is a strange/enigmatic thought that in the physical world, the organisation of an organism’s body and its necessarily organised way of life provide the energy to give it life and make it Life, and conversely, the brain burns glucose to create the organisation that we call thought [chapter 95].

Thus, it is naturally part of the organisation of the tribe that questions are asked about where the tribe came from and where is it going and these questions are orthogonalities [independent but entangled] of the energy of ‘fighting for existence’. As these questions are orthogonal to the present life of the tribe, they require a statement in the past and in the future and those statements are the ‘creation myth’ where a story of the creation of the tribe comes into being and in the future is ‘where do we go when we die?’.

This makes the creation myth and a religion mandatory because the universe is constructed on orthogonalities and a tribe is part of the universe. I have heard it said that the brain contains a section that generates religion, but it seems far simpler to consider religion to be a function of the space that we live in, through an orthogonality of our presence. This explains the enigma of why every tribe throughout the world has a creation myth that ranges from ‘dream time’ of the Australian aboriginals to the Greek gods of mount Olympus. Further, and in particular, orthogonality explains why we have the modern religions. As the complexity of our lifestyle increases, so does the complexity of the religion. I can cite as a simple progression the stories of the Australian aborigines, the ancient Greeks and modern religions.

This is a bold statement, but, I believe, not a ‘step too far’ because the modern religions of Christianity and Islam are more complex than the families of the Greek gods in that they are orthogonalities of the time, and the concept of religion is the sum of the contexts of each believer and the concept of a universal religion is the sum of the beliefs of every tribe. In fact, the point of this paper it to show that organisation is the sum of all organisations and that they are interchangeable [as a, b, c, …. are interchangeable, but total 1] and allow us to manage organisation

A digression to consider the effects of thought as the function of the mind might be appropriate. It is generally believed that the ‘rise of man’ occurred because his brain became larger, but this statement may not be accurate because the Neanderthal’s brain was thought to be larger than ours and thus his mental capacity should have been greater. ‘Unlike the Neanderthals, the ancestors of modern humans were accomplished artists, as the cave paintings and sculptures of France and Spain show.’ (The Archaeology of the Afterlife, Tony Allan, p 71) ‘Neanderthals underwent a long period of evolutionary divergence over as much as 500,000 years.’ (Discovery!, Brian M. Fagan ed., p 229)

Thus, the Neanderthal brain could be considered to be similar to the brains of our ancestors and different to our brain and that a mutation occurred that increased its energy consumption and organisational efficiency. Given that each neuron in the brain has approximately 10,000 dendrites joining the neurons, which form the memories in the brain, a small increase in efficiency of consuming energy and/or growing dendrites could provide the explanation for the change in mental ability between the Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals

‘The Chauvet Cave, discovered in December 1994 by cavers …. Is one of the most important and remarkable sites of Palaeolithic art…. dated more than 50 times …. between 32,000 and 30,000 years ago …. Their sophisticated nature and elaborate aesthetic shows that during the Upper Palaeolithic, art did not develop in a linear way, as was once believed, but the art of the first European Cro-Magnons – the Aurignacians – had already reached its peak.’ (p 118)

What is this saying? I believe that the mind/brain grew over time to produce the organisation/thought needed to comprehend the organisation of our ancestors’ lives until it reached a level in homo sapiens where the energy consumed [about 20% of the total] produced excess that required expression in art and later in religion, the state etc. The growth of the ‘power of the mind’ is a facet of evolution that is still going on today where our mind is still able to comprehend the massive increase needed to cope with today’s modern world. A countervailing influence is the simplification that I am advocating through the simplified generality of philosophy, physics, mathematics etc.

I hasten to add that I know little about the comparative structure of religion in general, and am a generalist in that regard, however, it is apparent that a more primitive view, that giant snakes created rivers can be compared to the more advanced notions of the family of Greek gods etc. It appears that we prefer our gods to be divine [orthogonal to us] and different to us, but not significantly different that imagining them strains the imagination. I cite the Bible that ‘we are made in God’s image’ or that the Middle Eastern deities are human-like with strange ‘heads/faces’ and/or wings sprouting from their backs.

Also, I find it interesting that there is a need for members of small tribes to move between tribes to prevent in-breeding and that the transferees apparently have no problem believing in a new creation myth at another tribe, so apparently, it is the need to believe in something [orthogonality] and a lesser need for what is believed. ‘A creation myth (or creation story) is a cultural, traditional or religious myth which describes the earliest beginnings of the present world. Creation myths are the most common form of myth, usually developing first in oral traditions, and are found throughout human culture. A creation myth is usually regarded by those who subscribe to it as conveying profound truths, although not necessarily in a historical or literal sense.’ (List of Creation Myths, Wikipedia)

This need for religion and the ability to change the face of religion can be seen when viewing religion over the whole of history. In spite of efforts to keep religion unchanging over the millennia, the above shows that a change can be set in motion when the general populous find a religion more in line with their desire. This is a sweeping statement that will be addressed below, but there is no doubt that religions are constrained [inquisition, Jewish faith] over time and it is welcome news that change can be effected easily, when required. In other words, it is the worshippers that decide whether to believe and support a particular religion.

This ‘sweeping statement’ is only ‘sweeping’ because of the complexity in the number of religions that are ‘hived off’. ‘Estimates of the number of new religions vary, but probably there are about 10,000, spread over such regions as Nigeria, Ghana, central Kenya, Zaire and South Africa’. (The World’s Religions, Second Edition, Ninian Smart, p 546) The growth/change in religion parallels evolution where the species continues and supports variation until a distinct species/religion evolves. This should not be surprising because the universe is based on a simple fractal/probability space produced by the creation equation and the fractalness generates the apparent complexity that we see, but given that evolution is based on survival of the fittest, the same process could apply to religion. All religions, in the limit, accept a creator, even if not expressly stated, and I can say that because the universe had to come into being/creation then God must have invoked the creation equation [(1+(-1))=0]. It is possible that it occurred spontaneously, but no one knows for sure whether God or chance produced the creation.

It is apparent that our civilisation is heading for problems with over-population and yet current religions are ignoring or even seeking more population growth. The basic problem is that we have interfered with survival of the fittest by using agriculture to increase the food supply and have yet to formulate or enact a survival of the best. The concept of survival of the best is simply another word for evolution and we must decide what form the ‘best’ will be, but certainly it must contain population control. Someone, some how, will have to use the mathematics of concepts/context and line up the concepts required for the future, assign a worth to each entanglement and devise a method to achieve their success in the future. Survival of the fittest is the fallback situation. This might appear difficult at first sight, but it can be done in a number of ways and not all of them are abhorrent to modern thought. Survival of the fittest uses the less-fit as a food source, genocides have been with us for millions of years, but a little thought can effect the same ends by other means and in particular, Chapter 54: The Determination Orgene, Selecting the ‘Best’ and a General Solution to ‘Struggle Street’ and the World’s Overpopulation.

Let us take a moment to consider the problem at hand, which is to condense the fractal complication of daily living to its essence using the creation equation and I will be using the up/down and sideways orthogonalities that are the general mathematical physics. This is the generalist’s view and we are pulling together religion and the future of the human race that is in jeopardy through lack of organisation In other words, from the creation equation (1+(-1))=0, where energy (1) and organisation (-1) are orthogonal, entangled but not equal because they are different things, burning sugar produces energy that creates thought [organisation], the energy of Life produces religion [organisation], the organisation of religion produces the energy of emotion found in religion, the organisation of music produces emotion and so on. Further, ‘the nation-state has many of the appurtenances of a religion…. rituals… emotional… narrative… doctrines… ethical… social and institutional… Finally, there is of course much material embodiment of the nation in its great buildings and memorials, its flag, its great art, its sacred land, its powerful military hardware.’ (p 24)

As mentioned above, religion is described as the sum/context of the concepts/terms above [rituals… emotional… narrative… doctrines… ethical… social … institutional and material] and each of these concepts can be expanded into contexts and this can be continued until everything in the universe is considered and taken into account. This statement is exactly the conditions found in a probability space [(a+b+c …)=1], for all a, b, c …, and, we can consider all concepts a, b, c …. because a probability space allows all a, b, c ….

Religion and governance are similar and could be considered to be the same. ‘In ancient Greece religion and politics were often combined. At Athens the acropolis was both the fortified heart of the city and the site of its sacred buildings’ (p 206). Also, religion is used as an aid to governance. ‘Emperor Shi Huangdi (Shih Huangti, reigned 221 – 210 B.C.E.), there were greater attractions for a ruler in taking up Confucian thought – partly its traditionalism, which was important in the legitimation of rule; partly its ritualism, which could be taken up into the practices of the central government; and partly for its moralism’ (p 121)

Thus religion and state should work together and further, religion, police, judiciary and government become in loco parentis and that involves what I call an organisational ‘gene’ [orgene] because it is illogical from the (in loco parentis) parent because it actively works against the parents’ interests except that it is necessary for the preservation of the species, which makes child abuse by the clergy etc. and religious terrorism particularly heinous and against nature. [Notice that the penal/judicial system are extending the detention times for these crimes.] We should go further so that religion and state complement each other in loco parentis to present a united front and I will show below, that the inability of religion to actively change, as against hiving off new religions is causing problems, such as the massacres occurring at schools in the USA.

For example, for Christianity, ‘at councils, such as the Council at Nicaea in 324, the more abstract doctrinal formulae of Christian orthodoxy were formulated and affirmed’ (p 258) and for Islam ‘Uthman ordered a fast turnaround on the Holy Book. Memorised revelations would be written down and scattered parchments of scripture would be assembled, all to be distributed as one version of the Koran. The “imperfect” or unofficial copies were to be destroyed’ (The Trouble With Islam, Irshad Manji, p 142) In other words, these major religions and others throughout history changed when needed, but today, both have become ‘solidified’ and unchanging. Another example is the Catholic Church that is opposed to population restriction and ‘most American Catholics do not heed Papal pronouncements on birth control’ (The World’s Religions, Second Edition, Ninian Smart, p 396).

Religion evolves over time [in a species way that new religions are hived off] and its complexity generates its alluring emotion so that it produces a change in peoples’ emotions by attending a religious event, but religions tend to ossify/fundamentalise as the centuries progress and many new variants of religion split-off as life and time change and the state should try to compensate for this lack of change in religious instruction and ethical instruction in schools. This teaching is not enough for everybody because organisational physics tells us that only a few offspring make it to adulthood and it is fear of death that engenders respect for living within an organisation Thus, the presence of guns in society produces the respect for people that is the basis of civilisation and it is the fault of governance [in loco parentis] that this respect is not fostered sufficiently (see chapter 107).

‘The recovery of Assyrian reliefs, such as this relief from Nimrud which depicts soldiers in the foreground and hanged men in the background, seemed to confirm a biblical image of Assyrian cruelty. These scenes of violence were positioned in audience halls as stark reminders to vassals and allies of the very real penalties for disloyalty.’ (The Middle East, Chief Consultant Dr Stephen Bourke, p 174) The violence of life in the ancient world may have generated an orthogonal religion such as Christianity and later Islam based on love, not violence. Given that the accounts [bible] were written down long after the events happened, it is possible that Christianity was ‘forced’ into its form as an orthogonality to the brutality of the period.

In other words, Christianity and Islam could have been designed in an attempt to change society and inadvertently chose an orthogonality and ‘locked’ (perhaps ‘lucked’) into a fundamental organisational mode that ensured its successful spread. It appears that an orthogonality occurred from hunter-gatherer to agriculture and survival of the fittest was left behind and civilisation progressed without a ‘chosen’ path. The parable of Sodom and Gomorrah suggests that the organisation of civilisation was not going well.

Given the closeness of religion and state, ‘the ancient Jewish tradition of the Temple, before it was destroyed in 70 C.E., was preoccupied with the rituals of sacrifice …. sacrificial rituals are important among Brahmin forms of the Hindu tradition.’ (The World’s Religions, Second edition, Ninian Smart, p 13) Sacrifice of animals may have contributed to the organisation of religion, but human sacrifice took it to a higher level, as seen in South America with children ‘the Ice Maiden had been ritually sacrificed …. the Inca believed that such a sacrifice brought honour on the parents and a blissful afterlife for the victim.’ (Discovery, Ed. Brian M. Fagan, p 101) Major monuments at Teotihuacan were actively rebuilt or enlarged throughout their history and that sacrificial burials were often integrated into the nucleus of the pyramids during construction…. They represent a range of social status, from high ranking dignitaries to the lowest social classes or ethnic groups humiliated with extreme violence during the consecration ceremonies.’ (p 194)

Further, ‘the Scythian’s’ elaborate burial rites …. Grave goods, including magnificent Greek goldware, were placed around the corpse, along with bodies of sacrificial victims, both human and animal.’ (The Archaeology of the Afterlife, Tony Allan, p 132) The earliest burials yet discovered hark back to the Shang dynasty, traditionally dated to the Bronze Age years from 1766 to 1027 BCE…. The killings were on a huge scale. In one case, the bodies of 24 women lined the ramp on one side of a burial pit, and 17 men on the other…. A group of 17 mass graves located close to the burial site yielded 160 decapitated skeletons.’ (p 136) Even the ancient Greeks may have participated because ‘the body in the antechamber turned out to be that of a woman between 25 and 27 years old…. Philip III Arrhidaeus, Alexander’s stepbrother and eventual heir as ruler of Macedon , who died in 317 BCE.’ (p 120)

‘This sacrificial context has generated much scholarly debate.’ (p 199) Clearly, no consensus of opinion exists and I could throw in another reason, and that is the simple reason that it works! The ‘extreme violence’, especially as it could be anticipated, would generate emotional energy that creates an organisation, of some description, around the building, at least at the time. This effect is also noted as ghosts around the site of murdered victims that have not been ‘laid to rest’ and sacrificed children may have affected the rain [organisation of weather by their emotional energy] because everything is entangled in a probability space that, I believe, is our universe.

To return to the problem of bringing all the religions together, the problem is in our minds and is a product of our minds because there are only two things in this universe, namely energy and organisation Our minds are free to roam as they wish [all a, b, c …], but the physical rules are those that were laid down by the creation equation [organisational physics]. Organisation, as the counterpart of energy can be expressed as the sum of all organisations, including individual religions, the monumental works of the state, families and so on. This is similar to ‘Vivekananda’s views were as follows. The Divine exists at two levels. At the higher level it is without qualities; it is not to be described… But at a lower level God has qualities and takes on form: she is Kali or he is Siva or Visnu … or Ramakrishna.’ (The World’s Religions, Second edition, Ninian Smart, p 410)

Given that organisation is the sum of all organisations, that people need to believe in proportion to their energy output, that the belief may take many forms, there is scope to manage the population in ways that contribute to bettering the individuals in that population. Survival of the fittest is a physical solution and in its overall conceptual form is the fallback organisation and if we want to change that system, as we have with technology, a different system must be put into operation and that solution can only come from the application of the mind/brain based on downward requirements of what we need and that is only attainable using the bottom-up physical possibilities that the universe has to offer [organisational physics].

Conclusion: there is nothing difficult in what has been said above, but we have been guilty of only using top-down thinking and mistakes have been made that threaten the planet [global warming, excess population etc.]. It is obvious that thinking [organisation] comes from the burning of sugar in the brain and that the organisation of a tree can be converted to heat/energy when burnt and the basic problem is the inability to recognise this interdependence and that it is the basis of creation.

Our brain had to evolve to use energy to create a mind of sufficient power to produce the organisation of technology and now we have to develop the organisational power to direct technology and that can only come through modifying traditional mathematical physics to a general mathematical physics.

References: all quotations are fully referenced in the body and earlier chapters can be found on darrylpenney.com or from the author on darryldarryl1@bigpond.com

Chapter 95: The Organisation and Software behind the Mind and Abstract Thought

Chapter 54: The Determination Orgene, Selecting the ‘Best’ and a General Solution to ‘Struggle Street’ and the World’s Overpopulation.

Chapter 107: Filosofy Rewrites Philosophy to be Able to Explain Beauty, Music, the Golden Triangle, Emotion etc. and How to Approach the Gun Question