When not go the whole nine yards and adopt atheism? As it is we're already down to one last man as it were. Let's finish him off too, oui? — Agent Smith

Maybe monotheism just modulates (has modulated) so that yesterday's holy ghost is today's blob of rationality. Perhaps monotheism was (is) so successful because it mirrored/mirrors the ego convention central to our capitalistic culture.

That Feuerbach, unlike Strauss, never accepted Hegel’s characterization of Christianity as the consummate religion is clear from the contents of a letter he sent to Hegel along with his dissertation in 1828.[7] In this letter he identified the historical task remaining in the wake of Hegel’s philosophical achievement to be the establishment of the “sole sovereignty of reason” in a “kingdom of the Idea” that would inaugurate a new spiritual dispensation. Foreshadowing arguments put forward in his first book, Feuerbach went on in this letter to emphasize the need for "the I, the self in general, which especially since the beginning of the Christian era, has ruled the world and has thought of itself as the only spirit that exists at all [to be] cast down from its royal throne."

This, he proposed, would require prevailing ways of thinking about time, death, this world and the beyond, individuality, personhood and God to be radically transformed within and beyond the walls of academia.

Feuerbach made his first attempt to challenge prevailing ways of thinking about individuality in his inaugural dissertation, where he presented himself as a defender of speculative philosophy against those critics who claim that human reason is restricted to certain limits beyond which all inquiry is futile, and who accuse speculative philosophers of having transgressed these. This criticism, he argued, presupposes a conception of reason is a cognitive faculty of the individual thinking subject that is employed as an instrument for apprehending truths. He aimed to show that this view of the nature of reason is mistaken, that reason is one and the same in all thinking subjects, that it is universal and infinite, and that thinking (Denken) is not an activity performed by the individual, but rather by “the species” acting through the individual. “In thinking”, Feuerbach wrote, “I am bound together with, or rather, I am one with—indeed, I myself am—all human beings”

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ludwig-feuerbach/

As I read Wittgenstein and others, the language of the tribe is always already a kind of not-so-holy ghost that exists like a film or web between the nodes of the bodies of the tribe's members. Add to that the ethic of being 'rational' and 'unbiased' and admitting as really really really real only what is determined by rational and unbiased claims, and you have a reality that is rational (all else is 'illusion' or 'superstition') and a rationality that grasps or articulates (only) the real.

Perhaps polytheism appeals to and reflects as less 'uptight' and psychologically organized way of being human (I of course exclude who take polytheism playfully or think all gods are really just one.). We then simultaneously model the 'outer' world as one unified 'machine' and the 'inner' world as one unified 'agent.' Mirroring this we have God the creator and his single creation, which itself is a system that mirrors God's benevolent and organized mind.

In reason,, reasoning, attempts to reason, we're family, united. In what are we distinct, unqiue, one-of-a-kind thing? When do I become me and when do you become you such that $I \neq You$?

Individuality, community, reason as the glue that unites us.

Laplace, where is God in all this? — Napoleon

I have need of only God's reflection general — Laplace

Your premise is wrong: monotheism was not born after reasoning that one God is able to do everything. Monotheism was born because one God prevailed over the other Gods because of cultural and historical processes that happened over time.
Once we realize this, we understand that working based on a wrong premise would be a waste of time.

Monotheism was born because one God prevailed over the other Gods because of cultural and historical processes that happened over time. — Angelo Cannata

Where does it say that?

In what are we distinct, unqiue, one-of-a-kind thing? — Agent Smith

I'd say: our bodies and the way they are trained by unique histories with unique reactions within a biological and cultural range of possibility. Imagine the tribe as a squid and each of us as its tentacles. The nervous system of the squid is based on (among other things) electromagnetic radiation (so we can read one another's scribbles) and the vibration of air (so we can hear one another's words). Throw in some technology (which language will help us invent) and we can send messages through the fucking vacuum. For instance, Voice => Light => Voice. That's a robust nervous system.

And each tentacle has its own malleable local and imperfect 'version' or 'cell' of the operating system (in fact the whole operating system is distributed, without an official or complete version anywhere in some non-tentacle brain (so the analogy breaks down here a little.) ) This or that tentacle can use its local embodied OS to come up with some new trick that can be passed on over the 'wires' of language, until suddenly all the tentacles know that trick. Other tricks go out of fashion and die off. There's only so much room, for the microchip-tentacle-brains in this mixed analogy are finite in their capacity.

THE END

Interesting analogy. I hope you're not and, simultaneously, hoping you are, implying an egregore, because I really can't see our squid's head, just the tentacles with suckers that mean business if you catch my drift.

We're all alike (that's what keeps us together) and yet we're not (that's what gives us our individuality). Now you see it, now you don't.

You've identified one of the items that unify humanity (reason); homo sapiens (koff, koff). What makes me me and you you? Our own unique brand of unreason/irrationality? Classifed?

Before not too long, the revelation the gods were finally able to communicate to me, in an almost incredible, unbelievably vivid and lucid dream, will be exclusively revealed, here on this forum. Is it a coincidence a lot of talking and buzzing about gods, religion, good and evil, omni-everything, free will of God, determinism, elementary particles, (a)theism, JC, the bible, etc. to be heard? I will revelreveal before not too long.

because I really can't see our squid's head, just the tentacles with suckers that mean business if you catch my drift. — Agent Smith

Our friendly conversation together is part of that head. We (with our individual brains) are like neurons linked together in by English into a larger and better 'abstract' brain without a definite location, something that can correct out the malfunctions and distribute the innovations of any particular mortal brain.

just the tentacles with suckers that mean business if you catch my drift. — Agent Smith

Caligula inside, but only a few of us know it ?

s it a coincidence a lot of talking and buzzing about gods, religion, good and evil, omni-everything, free will of God, determinism, elementary particles, (a)theism, JC, the bible, etc. to be heard? — EugeneW

That's actually not unusual.

Before not too long, the revelation the gods were finally able to communicate to me, in an almost incredible, unbelievably vivid and lucid dream, will be exclusively revealed, here on this forum. — EugeneW

I look forward to you sharing it, friend.

Here, for example: https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/21944/

You can just put on Google something like "from politheism to monotheism" and you will find hundreds of studies that show the complexity of the transition, according to the specific context of each single religion.

That's an opinion. What isn't, oui?

I also think that we've all got Caligula inside, but only a few of us know it ? — lll

What about Incitatus?

Hai III! Yes, I thought so too, and wrote, for the sake of the story, that I actually didn't check. For the proper context. But last three weeks see an unusual (?????) activity about these things. Or do I see pregnant wives everywhere? Like a pregnant wife does? Time for a check. You made me curious. Still love your way to express! Keepem cooooming, dooz frash wints!

Why is ONE god preferrable to MANY gods? Is it easier to prove one god than many? If it is, I don't see it. How? Why?

Is it that, as @Angelo Cannata thinks, the world ain't big enough for the two of us kinda thing? They must've done themselves in. Why, that cunning fox! :smile:

The late Christopher Hitchens said (paraphrasing), the transition from polytheism (many gods) to monotheism (one god) should be regarded as progress as it means we're getting closer to the true figure (zero gods). — Agent Smith

This is a typical note of the late descendants of Xenophanes and Plato, who started the trend towards a unified, unreachable being or reality. X didn't like the many gods. P didn't like observable reality. The result can be seen around us. Why can't many (objective) realities or many gods co-exist?

It is an opinion based on research, studies, archaelogy, criticism, done by scholars all over the world.. As such, it helps for further research. What historical elements is your hypothesis based on?

Where did I say this?

Our friendly conversation together is part of that head. We (with our individual brains) are like neurons linked together in by English into a larger and better 'abstract' brain without a definite location, something that can correct out the malfunctions and distribute the innovations of any particular mortal brain. — lll

:ok: Nice! So, the human hive mind (network) is based on language! Didn't see that (coming)! It seems we had an www/internet long before what's-his-name invented the global network of computers using binary language.

What historical elements is your hypothesis based on? — Angelo Cannata

It's not, as you suppose, a hypothesis. It's a mathematical pattern: from many to one to...zilch/nada/zip/sifr/zero/cipher!

Rest assure AgentSmith. Like panther god told woodlouse god: sit back buddy, lay back and enjoy the play.

Why can't many (objective) realities or many gods co-exist? — EugeneW

Possibly, they do. Unless you're gonna go Thanos and find the real Dr. Strange among thousands of magic clones!

Rest assure AgentSmith. Like panther god told woodlouse god: sit back buddy, lay back and enjoy the play. — EugeneW

I hope I can (lay back). I don't think I can. I'll give it my best shot! Enjoy the show!

panther god — EugeneW

Black panther?

woodlouse god — EugeneW

What's that?

:chin:

Hmmm...

I'm going out for a stroll.

Religion and psychopathia are mixed frequently, by theists as well as atheists. Atheists, while meaning it well, use it as an excuse to stick to their unshakable belief. A diversion is easily get rid of by calling it an pathia, i.e, pathetic. Theists, not meaning anything at all, use it in their defense of their one OOOO-god. I have good proof for this assertion.

I'm going out for a stroll. — Agent Smith

Don't take it personal, Agent! I just picked two arbitrary examples from the story sent to me last week. Stroll along well!