Defining the word "God"

Before reading this, please read its preamble. Finding our ground is important.

I don’t think it’s possible to know what happens after we die, or if there is a spiritual realm from which a great mind guides the physical realm that we see. I find it hard to imagine proof that such a realm exists. Let’s say that we heard a voice booming from the sky, across the planet. Could that be this great mind, or could it be some advanced technology that we don’t understand? Or that someone died, returned from the dead, and described in detail what they saw. Could their experience be the result of a process in the physical brain?

And likewise, I find it hard to imagine proof that such a realm does not exist. Even if we came to an understanding of every quark in the universe, and could through our own technology perfectly create and simulate life, I don’t see how we could definitively dismiss the possibility that the perfectly-understood material world was created by a sentient being. Could reaching an understanding of the material world be part of a test for us?

I call myself agnostic because of this unresolvable uncertainty. Atheism, I think, is irrational, as is dogmatic belief in the existence of a spiritual realm.

But rationality is overrated.

There is a psychological dimension to the world, created by our unconscious minds. I am referring here to something like Jonathan Haidt’s elephant and rider metaphor. It is because of this human, psychological dimension that I can confidently say that God exists, without uncertainty.

A limit (in the mathematical sense) of abstractions may help to clarify what I mean. We can begin with the question: is 2 real? I have 2 arms, 2 shoes, and 2 apples is more food than 1. 2 is real because it’s useful. We can take a step further: is there a real difference between saying that I have 2 shoes and that I have 1, when I have 2? If 2 is real, then we can base our “truth” on the reality of the “2”. Note the lowercase T; I’m not talking about a Platonic ideal. A few steps further and we can ask: is honesty real? If we accept truth as real, then we can base our definition of honesty on a consistent adherence to that truth.

God is a pattern, created by the cooperation of many human minds working together to describe what is “good”. Regardless of the existence of a spiritual plane, we can observe behaviors that tend to be rewarded by nature and by each other, and behaviors that tend to be punished. Behaviors that make the world better and behaviors that make the world worse. Behaviors that bear good fruit and behaviors that bear bad fruit. The metaphysics of what happens to the soul after death, etc., doesn’t really matter; we can observe the fruit of our and each other’s actions while we’re alive.

Here’s the definition: “God” is an abstraction that represents the forces that drive us toward the greatest good, and represents them in a coherent, consistent, and personified way.

Personification and abstraction are helpful. “God desires steadfast love” (adapted from Hosea 6:6) is succinct, memorable, and broadly applicable. “People are usually more willing to contribute when you trust them” is a slim facet of the former statement.