i'd say there is a spectrum of comprehension, from lowest to greatest: > atheism ("nothing". plain, abstract language -- dissolution of experience and meaning.) > monotheism (one "god". "rng" through the whims of a singular discernible entity, an egregore created by few. language as tool of tribal governance.) > polytheism (many "gods". balance and natural/social order through benelovent egregores, manifested by many. language as tool of civilizational curation.) > henotheism (all "gods". egregores as emanations of something greater. language as a tool of inquiry beyond the veil of human experience.) > pantheism (all. the 'common denominator' or 'creative, generative principle'. language as a tool of teaching.) think about the people who argue that the advent of microscopy disproved the concept of aether. they've found a bajillion little critters and stopped their inquiry alltogether -- they didn't make any effort whatsoever to understand what animates "matter" afterwards. now, there exist all these bajillion things you could device names for and describe, even on occassion ostensibly comprehend (read: take educated guesses), but none can individually bring you any closer to a conclusion. (cont.)
Germany