“Where is God? I’ll tell you! We have killed him – you and I! We are all his murderers. But how did we do this? How were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Where is it moving? Where are we moving to? Away from all suns?” (Nietzsche 2001:125).
It is so much going on in such a small paragraph that I don’t even know where to start to unfold all that needs to be said to explain what it meant. So let me start by saying I adore Nietzsche and his philosophy. I think I have mentioned this before in my earlier posts, and I might have mentioned also that all the labels that people gave Nietzsche as a Nihilist or Atheist were totally wrong too. But what can you expect when in just one sentence Nietzsche manages to reveal some truth that goes beyond the dimensions of an average human knowledge and comprehending. It will take two or three posts (optimistically thinking) to explain what Nietzsche means when he says God is dead, we killed him, but I will try my best; I will give it a shot. I think I can do that because my philosophy of viewing of life is so much in synchronicity with Nietzsche’s ideas and philosophy, and I feel like it is my duty to try to explain ourselves and stop all the speculations, the best way that I could.
So, Nietzsche as many may already know, was an existentialist, and so am I. But what is an existentialist? What do they do, how do they think, how do they operate? Yes, lots of questions can be raised up. As you see the more you try to explain Nietzsche’s philosophy, the deeper you get into questioning everything. So, I will simplify this process by telling you a little story. This is an old Indian story of six wise men and an elephant. These six wise men were blind but smart (as they thought) one day met a little boy and an elephant. They asked the boy to explain what kind of animal was the elephant because they were blinded while looking at the sun for days to become wiser, and they’d never seen an elephant before that. The boy was not able to explain unfortunately, so the six wise men, wise indeed, decided to touch the elephant with their hands, to try to feel the shape of it and reach their conclusions this way. So the first wise man who touched the trunk explained that elephant must resemble a big fat snake. The wise man who touched one of the tusks said that instead, an elephant seems to resemble a spear. The one who touched the leg of the elephant added that an elephant resembles a pole. The wise man who had touched the side part of elephant’s belly added that his fellas must reconsider their observations and conclusions because according to him, elephant feels like a giant wall. And the sixth wise man who had touched elephant’s tail finally spoke, “I hate to break it to you my friends, but you are all wrong, because an elephant resembles a rope, instead.” The little boy was laughing, and not because little boy was smarter than the six wise men, but because his perspective was wider, and clearer. So, what Nietzsche would have done if he was one of the blind men? He would have said, “wait a second, we have six different points of views and each of us is making a permanent decision on how the elephant looks like based on only one perspective, our own.” Do you now see why Nietzsche said “We killed God?”
So, for an existentialist there is no right or wrong answer, there is only different perspectives. That is why, existentialists do not dismiss the existence of God, as some academics wrongly assume; they just admit that it is too wide and too big of a concept to reduce it into some verses on a holly book(s) or even into one person as in the case of Christianity. Are there different aspects of God, manifested in us or in one divine being, or in many, and so on? That could very well be true, and none of the existentialists would have denied that, because for an existentialist any perspective you decide to embrace stands true to you.
However, even though I am an existentialist, I would like to go a little bit beyond this acceptance, “agree to disagree” or, “each man for themselves.” I go beyond this, because as Nietzsche, I would too agree that there are different points of views and different perspectives, therefore, different type of truths. However, as you can see in the case of elephant none of these perspectives was the right one. They were all true but partly true, and therefore they were all wrong.
I like to play with words and concepts, I must admit, so when I revealed my plans to a friend, years ago, about writing my theory of antimatter that can explain somehow the concept of God, he immediately assumed I was going to take a side on one of the religious perspectives. Nevertheless, I shocked him when I announced that despite the fact that I had been a Catholic Christian for a while, or that I was married to a Jewish family and had much respect for the zealous way the keep their traditions going, despite the fact that I had explored a little bit of all religions, and liked and disliked them all, and because of this fact that they were all incomplete, I decided to not take any sides in my theory of antimatter. Poor old professor, he could not get his head around, as how I would do that. It is this general belief among us that if one has to talk about God, then one must take a side, because the only way humans are spoon-fed to understand the concept of God is through religion. Hence, we killed God and Nietzsche was right about that. So this wise professor insisted again in asking me on which side I stand and which religion in my opinion was right. I told him then, what I tell everyone in my blog through my posts that I am not on any religious side, because in my opinion, all religious views are right and wrong at the same time, just like the six wise men were about the elephant.
To prove God’s existence in my theory of Antimatter I use science, math and logic, I use induction, deduction and other theoretical methods to prove that our whole existence, the universe and everything in it came to be because of the momentum created when the energies of matter and antimatter were not balanced. Imperfection therefore is the reason for our existence, but perfection is the reason to improve and move forward, in order to bring things back in balance, at probably higher level of energies than they were before the momentum took place. In this case the purpose of our existence is not to just grow and become better and more knowledgeable individually, but to grow as a community. The purpose of life is not to improve the vision of one perspective only by adding more details into it to prove it right, but to share those details and perspectives with others and accept and understand others’ perspectives too. Only this way we can get the whole picture of life. But that is not all. Yes it is nice to help others get a better perspective in life, and yes, we need others and their perspectives because this is the only way to increase our own awareness about reality and life, however, in order to feel encouraged to do so, there must be a greater motivation. The lack of something very special to the core of our own existence is the fuel that keeps us going. I will share more about this ingredient in my next post.