Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
It serves well enough for most conversations. If someone wants to discuss my beliefs in depth, I switch to my own terminology. I still use God, though, more out of habit than precision.fantôme profane;1180152 said:My question to you would be when you use this shorthand term God does it serve your purpose? Does it convey your intended meaning to whoever you are communicating with, or does it confuse the issue? I suspect in your case the results are mixed, but if you find the term communicates more often than it confuses then that is the word you should use.
I would say that the concept you describe does fall into the God concept. For me the term denotes a wide variety of concepts, but that also makes it as less effective, or at least a less precise term.
My personal view of the universe has some factors in common with what you describe, I view it as a single unified entity that inspires awe and reverence (but not worship). But for me it is not sapient and so I would not call what I believe in God. If I were to do so (and I have in the past) it would tend to confuse more than communicate. So although I dont want to oversimplify, I would say this is seems to be a good place to draw the line.
Sapience seems like a reasonable line to draw to me.