Talk:Theism

create page and paragraph: strong theism (usually tautological to monotheism)

prerequisites for strong theism
(otherwise God or the gods might not be cosmogonic [world creators] and cosmocentric [the central force])

• self-causation/self-causality of personhood
• involvement of personhood in cosmogony

details in French: L'auto-causalité et la cosmogonicité de le personnétat

(Keep it because some English speakers speak French or use autotranslation. The main article has to be enriched.)

Religiologiquement, l'auto-causalité et la cosmogonicité de l'état de la personne ( anglais : personhood ) sont les principaux éléments du théisme fort ( personocratie métaphysique et non un rôle secondaire au divin ). Si le personnétat ( l'état de la personne ) n'est pas en soi auto-causé et cosmogonique, dans ce cas Dieu a des ingrédients, et en aucun cas il n'est aisé de prouver qu'ils co-sythétisent un tout indivisible tandis qu'en étant séparé de son essence ( ousia ). ( Le personnétat est produit par un organe pensant, qui doit remplir de nombreuses conditions préalables ; voir : « Mary Anne Warren - the criteria of personhood ». Le cerveau humain utilise de nombreuses parties pour atteindre le personnétat ; voir : Nancy Kanwisher, Mark Solms. Les théistes ne fournissent aucune explication sur les mécanismes de l'âme. L'âme est un simple méréologique ( voir : méréologie, simple en philosophie ), elle est donc incapable de transmettre des informations plus d'un shannon ( unité d'information ), et elle est incapable d'exprimer différentes sous-routines comme les aires de Brodmann. ) Il est très difficile pour un Dieu avec des ingrédients discrets ( inévident et multisubstantiel [avec de nombreuses substances] ) d'être interprété comme l'origine de tout.

Le Dieu impersonnel / athée, est un sophisme superficiel et une altération lexicale ( une confusion avec son antonyme généralement pour tromperie rhétorique ).

________

En philosophie, on ne peut prétendre avoir une vue supérieure qui reste injustifiée.

"charged particles in the neutron beam"?????

Why, why, why on earth was the below citation placed under 'Autotheism'?

I don't know who added it there but I'm sure there was a reason why.

I can't access the document; whoever placed it there, could you explain? Thanks :))

Jain, Mahavir (1976), "Neutron Experiments at Lampf", Few Body Dynamics, Elsevier, pp. 215–219, doi:10.1016/b978-0-7204-0481-4.50063-0, ISBN 978-0-7204-0481-4, retrieved 2020-11-10 FatalSubjectivities (talk) 12:48, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

theism = metaphysical personocracy (krátos: dominance, rule)

A personocratic/personocentric (based on personhood and at least one person) view on/about the first principles. In strong theism (not strong belief, but theism with strong characteristics = great importance given to personhood and at least one divine/supernatural person) God is the origin of everything/the absolute everything (which cannot be defined and cannot exist as a single entity because there is no set of all sets, no system of all systems, no axiomatic system of all axiomatic systems [yes we can play and create weird or alternative axiomatic systems]; and even if theoretically we could create a system which contained all the systems, we would require a mathematical definition for it... which would be infinite, and infinity cannot exist locally, it is a tendency... deeper questions about reality open. Even if we could claim that we cannot create an algorithm which would have to work an infinite amount of time, and place in some common file even mutually exclusive axiomatic systems in a protected unprocedural way which doesn't cancel them... that overall collection cannot have a mathematical definition; because it would require even different mathematics/allomathematics based on different axiomatics... and even if somehow we imagine an impossible infinity like that... it would be a monster of no internal coherence; or with infinite protective mathematical layers in order no procedure would cancel any mutually exclusive subroutine/subformula [we could dream something like the "absolute everything" but an infinite formula/description cannot be materialized, neither is the result of a single mathematical system, because the absolute everything would require the axiomatic system of all axiomatic systems, which doesn't exist [we can describe in a case-by-case basis incompatible formulas of different axiomatic systems; but there is no mathematical mechanism to let it run and find that infinity/the absolute [true] everything]/thus God cannot exist and for that reason [the absolute everything isn't a single reality/axiomatics/system/set, etc.]]. (Many physicists confuse [or don't care about physics; because in physical foundations we cannot avoid studying/examining if other universes are possible; also the "everything" isn't supposed to contain only universes] the "big everything" = "absolutely everything and not only what we can access or everything related to us and our environment" with the "small everything" = every law/onto-procedure and everything included in our universe.)

• metaphysical personocracy/theism = Greek: μεταφυσική προσωποκρατία/θεϊσμός

• metaphysical personocrat/theist = Greek: μεταφυσικός προσωποκράτης/θεϊστής m, θεΐστρια f

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2149:8AB8:3F00:28D0:340A:240:B4DB (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)