What fallacy is illustrated by this statement?:"The universe created us,& we created god in our heart & mind."

Question

Pls identify and describe the language fallacy in the statement.

fALLACY OF CONFUSING CAUSE AND EFFECT

Someone said : "This fallacy is followed in this general form:
A and B regularly occur together
Therefore A is the cause of B...."

This is NOT an example of the fallacy called "post hoc, ergo propter hoc."

Just so it is crystal clear. The quoted statement was made in response to a Q I asked. I did not make the statement and was looking to see if others could catch the very common fallacy.

Answer 1

Two parts to the statement, and I can see both a possible fallacy that would depend on your worldview and a possible fallacy that would depend on how you use your language.

We exist within the universe, we are a result of natural processes that occur within it. If natural processes are a form of creation, then the first part of the statement is true. Order may indeed come from chaos without violating the 2nd law of thermodynamics (snowflakes, for instance... but a more technical discussion on why this is true is beyond the scope of this discussion).

The 2nd part of the statement uses a different form of the verb "to create". We are sapient beings and we consciously attribute qualities, thoughts, actions, and desires to supernatural beings. We have since the beginning of our known history (Goddess worship has been recorded as far back as 10,000 BCE). If using our imagination to fulfill some social, emotional, or intellectual need is creation, then indeed we do create the supernatural in our hearts and minds (reference any of the thousands of different supernatural beings recorded throughout known history by all of the world's religions!). We also have an unconscious need for and an unconscious creation of the supernatural, but I advise the reader to read up on Joseph Campbell and Jung's archetypes for more in that vein.

The implications of using this analogy are what interest me about this statement - does the creation of supernatural beings (gods, demons, devils, angels, God, Satan, etc) by our ever-fertile imagination have similarities to the natural material processes of the world around us? Is it inevitable for us to believe in things we can't prove exist (ie, have faith in the supernatural)? So the worldview fallacy I mentioned would revolve around whether or not the questioner would deny what I've just said.

Alas, that is not the question. The question asks us to define the *language* fallacy in this statement. Therefore there is a presupposition that there is a *language* fallacy, not a fallacy of *meaning* or *content* or *philosophical worldview*. No philosophy required for this answer. =)

My first answer to the question would be that we cannot compare two different versions of the verb create; either creation is conscious or it is not - both cannot be true within the questioner's English definition of the verb "create" in this context, for the universe is not conscious and we are. Two different types of creation cannot be analogous.

I'm not very happy with my first answer because it plays to the questioner too much. My second answer to this question would be to point to the etymology of the word "create" and argue that the questioner's use of the word is overly narrow and that no language fallacy does indeed exist, that creation does not necessarily hinge upon conscious decisions, citing the 2nd law of thermodynamics, comparative religion, Jung's archetypes, the works of Joseph Campbell, and whatever else I can think of to un-narrow the questioner's mind.


Saul

Answer 2

So what created the universe then? There is also an assumption in that sentence that says the universe somehow had the mind to create. The universe is just a bunch of dust and gasses without a mind. If the universe did create us, it would have to have some kind of knowledge to create us...so really what you would be doing is substituting God for "the universe" because God has the mind and ability to create all living things. The universe that is just a bunch of dust and gases has no reason to create anything. God does!

Answer 3

I don't see any logical fallacy in the statement.

"The universe created us..." This might be untrue if by 'universe' you mean all that exists. We would then be part of that definition of the universe and it wouldn't make sense to say that the whole created one of its parts. But then again, you could say that we were created from materials found in the universe.

"...we created god in our heart & mind." We have the ability to imagine things that have no corresponding existence in reality. Therefore this statement isn't problematic.

Answer 4

fALLACY OF CONFUSING CAUSE AND EFFECT

This fallacy is followed in this general form:
A and B regularly occur together
Therefore A is the cause of B
This fallacy requires that there is not a common cause, that actually causes both A and B

Answer 5

I think there are fallacies more than one. The universe has not created us as many people believe that the God had created us. We are part of the universe. We coexist with universe. We are constituent of the universe.

So far as the Gods are concerned there are at least two types of God. The First one is the god which exists, if any and indicates the absolute and the essence of the Universe.

The second one is the class of gods which are being daily created, edited and deleted by the people interested in doing that.

In the second type of god, you lay down some criterion and want the god to fulfill that criterion. This criterion may be linguistic, logical, ontological or metaphysical. If the created god does not fulfill the criterion then its attributes and qualities are edited and modified till it starts fulfilling what it was not doing earlier. If despite all such editings, the god fails to fulfill your criterion then it is deleted and thrown in the Trash to create a new one.

This second type of god is the real problem for the people. It is created by individual people so the god of one person does not extend to the other persons. Such gods may be rightly called the verbal gods. They do not have any relation to the real god, if it exists.

The real god is a destination of approach. It is you and it is yours too.

I have explained this aspect of god in my article “Who is the Biggest – Me, My Mind or My God?” published at my web site
http://www.lightinlife.com/

the exact URL of the article is

http://www.lightinlife.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=65&Itemid=93



.

Answer 6

photograph that God is a guiding tension that provides the kinds and logic for the vast Bang to apply. there is ability (the Bang) in spite of the undeniable fact that it want actualities to objective at. A reason there is order rather of chaos. in spite of the undeniable fact that that's a tender God who works via best and persuading, no longer taking photos lightening bolts in any respect people who displeases his royal highness (an concept borrowed from the Romans i think of). So issues crawl, consistently in direction of greater and greater pleasing existence. inspite of each little thing, the universe is God's conciseness, the undeniable fact that provides him some thing to pay interest to.

Answer 7

well basically the heart is a pump - so we cannot 'create anything in our heart. And it wasn't the universe that created us it was natural forces which became the forces of evolution.

God was just one of the supernatural creations of humans to explain what was not explainable at the time.

Hopefully humans will soon out-grow the need for supernatural and understand the natural.

Note:
Now - isn't it interesting how one can be marked down for stating a few facts.

Answer 8

"The universe created us..." No fallacy there that I can see, unless by "us" you mean not our animal existence, but the content of our minds. Some people do believe that.
"...and we created...." Where is the fallacy there? We did that.