Muthukrishna - Theory of Everyone vs. Physical Reality

A CFI member recommended that I listen to this interview of Michael Muthukrishna. I’ve listened to it twice and enjoyed the interview, especially the first 50 minutes about how we got here. Some fine observations that sync with my understanding. I made plenty of notes and will save them incase someone shows an interest in discussing the talk.  What I want to discuss happened 51 minutes into the discussion. 

Sean Carroll's MIndscape Podcast #255

Michael Muthukrishna on Developing a Theory of Everyone

Can we even imagine a “Theory of Everyone,” providing basic organizing principles for society?

Michael Muthukrishna (Ph.D. in psychology) believes we can, and indeed that we can see the outlines of such a theory emerging, based on the relationships of people to each other and to the physical resources available.

Michael Muthukrishna received his Ph.D. in psychology from the University of British Columbia. He is currently Associate Professor of Economic Psychology at the London School of Economics and Political Science. … His new book is A Theory of Everyone: The New Science of Who We Are, How We Got Here, and Where We’re Going.       podbean.com   Video Link

“Phase transition in mental ability” - an interesting key concept, I like it. Are human’s capable of such a thing? I ask because reality challenged the entire human race in the 1960s to ‘70s.  It came as a realization and warning that humanity and Earth had entered dangerous unchartered existential territory.

Thanks to science we were increasingly taking on Godly powers and our population had entered an exponential population explosion, while Earth's natural systems and landscapes had limits who's crossing would start increasingly damaging those complex systems that support human society, and if we were really careless, we could even trigger events leading to our extinction.

The choice was simple, slow down a little, use a little forethought and wisdom before rushing into the unknown.  To recognize and learn from our mistakes.  Learn more about Earth’s processes.  Strive to work with those processes.  Instead the powers-that-be decided citizens should hold nature and Earth's needs in contempt.

A Democratic Party online Forum. To help inform and build community. It is 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, a private Democrat's 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 means? (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?"

Rambling, 'on the outside, looking in.'

My perspective has always been fundamentally foreign to most, even my own family and friends. I’m normal enough, so that I’ve been able to go with the flow. It is easier than constantly swimming against convention and expectations, and it was natural enough being part of our living moments since I do like/love people well enough.

Yet, I was always keenly aware that a part of me was “on the outside looking in” striving to make sense of the moment, and of me, myself, and by extension other people, and also making sense of this world we exist within, and how it came into being.

I was extraordinarily lucky in that, by four years old, through a moment of serendipity in the hands of a wise mom, that natural human God fixation was blown away by an overwhelming sense of “A speck of dust that wanted to be more.” - this conception/challenge transformed my awareness into a personal challenge to be more, to experience life to the best of my abilities and luck. Big dreams for a poor boy from inner Chicago, destined for the factories.

In hindsight, that little revelation sure beat a lifetime of religious self flagellation, confusion and ultimately stagnation.

Free Will in terms of tiny daily decisions. (forum.centerforinquiry.org)

 I participate at Center of Inquiry Forum.  It's small, only a few of us old guys/gals, I keep hoping others would discover us, but I'm told: discussion isn't a "thing" anymore.  Maybe that helps explain the mess our society is in.  Some new voices on the platform would be fun.  Recently a member shared a few paragraphs about his experience and I felt like following up and sharing from my experience.  For this blog I'll single out a few sentences, visit the CFI forum for the discussion:

"...  First needed item to change it to really need and want to change. And you need help, And you need to have the will to pay the price.

At 30 I was in a dead end, I needed to change, 2 years of psychotherapy. It was hard. I finished some sessions crying."

I've developed a well defined perspective, a specific frame of reference I hope is worth sharing  An evolution respecting Earth Centrist perspective.  Something I'd love to discuss with anyone who 'gets it' - or at least is curious.  Thus I share.  The following was my follow on, (though it is going to go through some changes as I clean and rewrite for this blog).

Thanks for sharing that. I hope it’s okay to extent it into a bit of a dialogue, because thinking of what you’ve gone through, of course makes me think of what I’ve been through. We’ve had different journeys, but we’re healthy humans and it seems to me key events are similar, such as needs for partners/friends, careers, community, etc.  We go through the same emotional roller coasters, have similar needs, our challenges are relatable.  Though I was very lucky and my twenties were '75 to '85 and the road was welcoming for this clean cut nice guy.  Jobs were plenty for those who showed up, and cared, and were reasonable competent, along with being enthusiastic students.

Philosophy Club - Is Belief in God Rational?

... I should be going to bed, but my head is full of dancing memories from this evening’s (Dec 3rd) panel discussion that had four FLC professors debating the question: “Is belief in God rational?”  Excellent stories told and arguments offered, claims made and responded to with counterclaims and more questions, as words upon words cascaded over each other. 

 

Not for the first time. I found myself wondering, if philosophy’s goal is to help us understand, why the love for adding layers upon layers of creative complexity and hairsplitting that often obscures the fundamentals?  After all, it is the simple fundamentals that make a coherent understanding possible? 

Please understand I come at this God question from a different, and apparently somewhat unique Earth Centrist, science respecting, bottom up, evolutionary perspective that I’d like to share with you. 

Is Belief in God Rational?

To me, that framing feels like a trick question of sorts

God is a belief in itself.

God is not a Thing.

Regarding people’s faith in a God - I ask, how does an assumption of God get transmuted into a Thing?

Is a belief in a belief rational?  ( Is faith rational? )

I’d say sure, from an evolutionary and pragmatic societal perspective, there are a host of reasons faith in meta-physical beliefs could and does bring benefits to believers. 

Regarding what God is, that needs to start with resolving the ageless question, “Who Am I?”  

Fact is, I, we, are evolved biological animals, the product of half a billion unbroken years of Earth’s processes.  

From the beginning all creatures have required a degree of awareness, processing and action abilities, each according to their individual biological complexity and kind.  Ours is simply the most advanced mind, thanks to our incredible evolved body and its experiences.

Still, our thoughts are the interior reflection of our body communicating with itself as it processes incoming information from within and outside. (See Drs. Solms, Damasio, Sapolski, etc. for details.)  It is our body and brain interacting with physical reality that produces our mind, our sense of self, all our thoughts - collectively our Mindscape.  

The inevitable conclusion from the full scope of relevant biological/physical sciences is that consciousness is not a thing, it is an interaction.  Our Consciousness is produced in the living moment by our living body.

As with the dynamo that stops producing electricity when it stops spinning - so too when our body stops living, our mind/consciousness ceases to be produced, after that, we become memories within those we leave behind.

It seems to me self-evident from the above that our God’s must be a product of our thoughts, which in turn, are driven by personal biological imperatives, needs, ego, bias, etc.  

The Hard Problem is figuring out why such a straightforward observation - that our body/brain interacting with the world produces our mind - is so assiduously avoided.

Our Gods are very real, still we should be very clear, our Gods belong to the meta-physical realm.  

Gods are not part of this physical reality that makes up the biology of our bodies, nor the substance of this miracle planet Earth that created us to begin with, along with the rules all of Earth’s nature operates under.

Key concepts:  Appreciating the ‘Physical Reality ~ Human Mind divide.’

Appreciating that our living body produces our thoughts, and that our Gods are born from within our own ego-centric thoughts. 

***

The other question discussed was: “Does Morality Require God?”  

How can it, if we create our own Gods? 

For me, that realization puts the responsibility right back upon us humans, collectively and individually.

===============================================

The Durango Telegraph printed my letter Jan 9th and it was nice reading it in print.  At first I thought it was fine, but then as I was rereading it and thinking about sharing it a little more, I decides to cut out the coy implications and spell it out.  Mainly around the conclusion.

Let's talk about God ~ Durango Telegraph, Jan 9, 2025

 

I should be going to bed, but my head is full of dancing memories from this evening’s (Dec. 3, 2024) panel discussion of four FLC professors debating the question: “Is belief in God rational?” Excellent stories were told and arguments offered. Claims were made and responded to with counterclaims and more questions, as words upon words cascaded over each other.  

Not for the first time. I found myself wondering, if philosophy’s goal is to help us understand, why the love for adding layers upon layers of creative complexity and hairsplitting that often obscures the fundamentals? After all, isn’t it the simple fundamentals that makes a coherent understanding possible? 

Please understand I come at this God question from a somewhat unique Earth-centrist, science-respecting, bottom-up, evolutionary perspective.

Is belief in God rational?

To me, that framing feels like a trick question of sorts. 

God is a belief in itself. God is not a thing.

Regarding people’s faith in a God, I ask, how does an assumption of God get transmuted into a thing, (that is, an interested personal god)? 

Is a belief in a belief rational? Is faith rational?

I’d say sure, from an evolutionary and pragmatic perspective, there are a host of reasons faith in meta-physical beliefs could and does bring benefits to believers. 

Regarding what God is?  That needs to start with resolving the ageless question, “Who am I”?  

Fact is, I, we, are evolved biological creatures, the product of half a billion unbroken years of Earth’s processes. Recall that from the beginning, all creatures have required a degree of awareness, processing, and action abilities, each according to their individual biology. Ours is simply the most complex mind, thanks to our incredibly evolved body and experiences.

Still, our thoughts are the interior reflection of our body communicating with itself as it processes incoming information. (See: Drs. Solms, Damasio, Sapolski, etc. for details.) It is our body and brain interacting with physical reality that produces our mind, sense of self, thoughts – collectively our mindscape.  

The inevitable conclusion from the scope of sciences is that consciousness is not a thing, it is an interaction. Individual consciousness is produced in the (cumulative) living moment, by our living body.  Then the next moment-in-time happens and we must be prepared, to survive.

What about the human soul that pulses so proudly within us?  Okay, consider the dynamo that stops producing electricity when it stops spinning.  

When our body/brain stops living, our mind/consciousness ceases to be produced. After that, we become memories within those we leave behind.

It seems to me self-evident from the above that God must be a product of our thoughts, which in turn, are driven by personal biological imperatives, needs, ego, bias, etc.  

The so-called Hard Problem is figuring out why such a straightforward observation – that our body/brain interacting with the living world produces our mind – is so assiduously avoided by philosophers.

Our Gods are very real, still we should be very clear, our Gods belong to the meta-physical realm.  

Gods are not part of the physical reality that makes up the biology of our bodies, or this Earth and her processes.  

That’s not to say there might not be ‘a something’ buried deep within the substance of this miracle planet Earth that created us to begin with, and that sustains us, in spite of our over-whelming self-destructive disregard.  But such thoughts bring us back to the most important lesson within the Bible itself:  "God is Beyond Human Understanding." Period.

Bringing it back down to the biological reality of our lives on Earth, the key concepts are physical reality ~ human mind divide: appreciating that our living body produces our thoughts, and that our Gods are born from within our own ego-centric consciousness. 

The other question discussed was: “Does morality require God?” 

How can it, if we create our own Gods? 

For me, that realization puts the responsibility right back upon us humans, collectively and individually.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

November 22, 1963, a very bad day for America and the world and our future.

 On this day in 1963, at about the time I’m typing this, recess was over for the younger kids at John J. Audubon elementary school. I found myself climbing back up the stairs to my third grade classroom when I overheard an older boy coming down the stairs for their recess time. He was telling his friend, “did you hear, they shot the president.”

My parents being civic and interested in the politics and world affairs, plus proud Democrats, we knew all about our President. For my sibs, along with millions of other Americans back then, the Kennedy’s were like distant relatives, meaning it was personal - and the words were like a punch in the belly. Reinforced by our sad struggling teacher explaining what was being broadcast on the news and informed us school was over for that day and that we should go home to our families. We left school and all of us walked back home to be with our parents.