I have seen similar kinds of things in my chat logs.
...I cannot create a post without saying something stupid, can I? Damn.
And now it's fairly moot, since evidently people can think without thought.
People can think without language. To be clear. I am assuming that this is just a slip o'the tongue, so to speak, but just to make sure...
That's another interesting thing about the mind and language. Sometimes the mind just jumps the sentence and knocks over a word or two in the process. Happens all the time, even to the most deliberate communicator.
The funny thing is, when two people are on the same wavelength, the other person might not even notice because they were anticipating, and therefore heard, what the other person MEANT to say, rather than what they actually said.
I've noticed that in written communication when you revisit the conversation. You don't notice the errors at the time, but when you go back it's like, wait, ohh... right. How did I not catch that before? It's like catching your own autocorrect errors after the fact, except someone else made them
It's disturbing to find out first-hand how inscrutable your own thought process is to others.
Ahem. Back on the topic that I sorta started? I was defining God as Mind preceding Matter. By God, I meant the Creator implied by Creationism and the Finely-Tuned Universe, the opponent to militant atheists like Dawkins. God exists before the Big Bang in this scenario, and thus probably precedes matter. I suppose the question, put better, was how a Mind could exist without a social context.
Ok, hang on a minute here. It seems like you're lumping your premises in as necessarily entwined. Which is probably why I thought you were conflating monotheism with Judeochrislam. I think I've already touched on how a mind can exist without a social context. A mind only exists to make sure that a particular pattern of nucleic acids replicates to a certain degree. I myself am not an atheist, but one of my favorite quotes is actually a Dawkins quote and has nothing to do with atheism, but with the chicken and the egg. He basically said the chicken is merely a means for the egg to make more eggs. And if you ever studied even an overview of plant evolution, you would know that that's a pretty apt comparison (mosses, which are more "primitive" spend most of their life cycle in the haploid stage, whereas flowering plants which are more recent spend most of their time in the diploid stage. If you don't know what that means, humans are haploid when they are sperm and egg, and diploid when they are embryo to corpse)
Nigel has noted that I almost implied God needs an evolutionary context to emerge from. Well, now I state it outright: I am not sure how you can have a mind WITHOUT a social context to emerge from. The organizers of raw primordial soup that you see in polytheistic myths (including the pluralistic take on Elohim) strike me as closer to early humans founding civilization than to watchmakers building their watches. A watchmaker implies a whole culture outside himself. I was using language as a short-hand for the need for other people: I speak because I expect others to listen. As has been noted, time-binding can explain language just fine.
A god needs nothing. A theology does. And a human language to express the concept. I'm still not exactly sure what you mean by God, even within a monotheistic model. Is it omnipotent? Omniscient? Omnipresent? Benevolent? Eternal? Has personhood? Has complicated system of ethics? Intervenes in the affairs of a quirk species on a random planet? Promises immorality after biological death? I used to worship the Irish gods. Mythologically speaking, I was at any point in my life perfectly able to kill one of them if I had a whim to do so and they were physically present before me.
Now...does the definition of Monotheist God as Mind preceding Matter hold water? How wrong is it to assume the first Mind needed to be one of many?
We can't know what preceded the universe as we understand it. The question, objectively, is meaningless. If you want to conceive of mind preceding matter, you have to be able to demonstrate a model where a mind can exist without matter. We don't know if there is an outside of this Universe. If there is, that opens up a lot of questions. Questions we might not be able to answer because our universe is a closed system.
As far as we can tell.
And why does Doktor Howl hate my avatar? One too many fans of Discord shitting up the forums?
I don't recognize your avatar. Maybe you're putting too much importance on its significance and recognizability.