1

Have any reputable philosophers considered this concept? If so, which ones? And how did they account for responsibility and accountability in this framework?

  • 3
    If the idea originated with you, you can hardly expect others to tell you what it means. If you had the idea without any context there may be answers athttps://psychology.stackexchange.com But as it stands the question is not a good fit here. - I'll say this though, no story with someone attributing themselves remotely godlike properties, ended well. – christo183 Feb 6 at 9:32
  • 2
    @rus9384 I thought I was God once. Worst day of my life! – christo183 Feb 6 at 12:33
  • 2
    You could mean we must solve our own problems without resort to a higher power or powers. But some of this "we" you speak of might (might!) get the idea that they could disobey the traffic laws, or any other law they disagreed with, because, after all, we are our greatest Gods. It seems to me your statement can be "sourced" generally from Nietzsche. So perhaps you can study him, then read some material critical of Nietzsche's thought. – Gordon Feb 6 at 16:27
  • 2
    Welcome to the site! Soliciting responses to your own personal philosophy is explicitly off-topic here, so I edited your question into a reference request. – Chris Sunami Feb 6 at 17:23
  • 1
    Why was the question closed after the edit, btw? – rus9384 Feb 6 at 19:58
4

There's actually some discussion of this, believe it or not, in the Bible. Psalm 8 describes the exalted status of human beings, and Jesus in John 10:34 quotes Psalm 86's "You are gods" --although it's ambiguous whether either the Psalm or Jesus' invocation of it are meant to refer to (ordinary) human beings. When you come right down to it, the entire Christian religion is about God manifesting in the form of a human being.

Outside of a traditional religious context, some of the atheist existentialists considered human beings to be godlike in their command over their own destinies. I'm thinking here in particular of Sartre and Nietzsche. The secular humanist movement is sometimes described as making a god out of human beings (although chiefly by its detractors).

In the Christian context, an ordinary human being is still accountable and responsible to (capital 'G') God. In existential atheism, each individual is considered fully responsible for the entire world he or she lives in.

2

Consider the following 2 statements made by 2 saints at different times in different places.

  1. Jesus

Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and keep his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.” “You are not yet fifty years old,” the Jews said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!” “I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:49-58)

  1. Krishna

मां च योऽव्यभिचारेण भक्ितयोगेन सेवते।

स गुणान्समतीत्यैतान् ब्रह्मभूयाय कल्पते।।14.26।।

Whosoever serves Me alone with an unfailing devotion-Yoga, he, transcending these Strands, turns to be the Brahman.

श्री भगवानुवाच

इमं विवस्वते योगं प्रोक्तवानहमव्ययम्।

विवस्वान् मनवे प्राह मनुरिक्ष्वाकवेऽब्रवीत्।।4.1।।

The Blessed Lord said I imparted this imperishable Yoga to Vivasvan, Vivasvan taught this to Manu, and Manu transmitted this to Iksavaku.

(Manu and Iksavaku appeared on the Earth long ago before Krishna took birth on the Earth)


We have to understand that uttering of these words, though apparently quite confusing and egoistic, can be stated only by the persons, who attained highest state of SPIRITUALITY.

In Spiritual realm, there is a method of disciple meditating on his own GURU (TEACHER), who reached highest level in SPIRITUALITY, treating the latter as GOD.

https://www.swami-krishnananda.org/glossary/glossary_bc.html

1

The 4 mahavakyas (great statements) from the 4 Vedas are different variations on the unity of atma (roughly soul) with Brahma (v v roughly God).

The second is particularly iffy because Brahma (often spelt in English brahman to suggest neuter gender) is a more abstract principle than the Judeo-Christian YHWH.

  • I see that the question you asked is quite different from the short para now seen after drastic editing. The original much more in the camp of the personal "God-of-Abraham". That too is interesting in its own way but is obviously mismatched to my answer above. Apologies!! – Rusi Jun 6 at 11:47
  • Someone showed me this more secular perspective on the same question – Rusi Jun 6 at 12:54

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.