If you believe in G-d then you believe in a being that can change reality just by willing it
OK, so by that definition...if you instead believe in a perfect rationalist that has achieved immortality, lived longer than we can meaningfully express, and now operates technology that is sufficiently advanced to be indistinguishable from magic, including being involved in the formation of planets, then—what label should you use instead of ‘G-d’?
Khepri Prime, if the sequel to “Worm” goes the way I hope. More seriously, I don’t believe any of that, and physics sadly appears to make some of it impossible even in the far future. Most of us would balk at that first word, “perfect,” citing logical impossibility results and their relation to idealized induction. So your question makes you seem—let us say disconnected from the discussion. Would you happen to be assuming we reject theism because we see it as low status, and not because there aren’t any gods?
“Would you happen to be assuming we reject theism...”
Some LWers reject theism because they see it as low status, some for better reasons, and some do not reject it.
I do have an opinion on your personal motivations as opposed to those of other LWers, but it would be obviously unproductive to give it. So it is also an unproductive question.
I’d probably have to invent a name for it. Or I might use the term “godlike being”, implying that the being has some, but not all, characteristics in common with what people think of as God.
OK, so by that definition...if you instead believe in a perfect rationalist that has achieved immortality, lived longer than we can meaningfully express, and now operates technology that is sufficiently advanced to be indistinguishable from magic, including being involved in the formation of planets, then—what label should you use instead of ‘G-d’?
Khepri Prime, if the sequel to “Worm” goes the way I hope. More seriously, I don’t believe any of that, and physics sadly appears to make some of it impossible even in the far future. Most of us would balk at that first word, “perfect,” citing logical impossibility results and their relation to idealized induction. So your question makes you seem—let us say disconnected from the discussion. Would you happen to be assuming we reject theism because we see it as low status, and not because there aren’t any gods?
“Would you happen to be assuming we reject theism...”
Some LWers reject theism because they see it as low status, some for better reasons, and some do not reject it.
I do have an opinion on your personal motivations as opposed to those of other LWers, but it would be obviously unproductive to give it. So it is also an unproductive question.
I’d probably have to invent a name for it. Or I might use the term “godlike being”, implying that the being has some, but not all, characteristics in common with what people think of as God.
There’s “demigod” or if you like the Eastern flavour, “bodhisattva”.