[Lawtan]

Not meant as slander, honestly. More meant to illustrate his constructionist ideas with morality and maintaining the social/emotional benefits of religion, without religion. But, I digress...

It sort of is the question "what is a god?" It is hard to ascertain godhood, when the idea of a god is on the whole contradictory. There are some typical aspects, with which an approximation can be made (like has been done with the concepts of life, death, and will) - namely that a god has physical power, superior knowledge, and can manipulate the laws of the area (not all gods are omniscient, or even immortal)...but several would disagree. Some societies use "god" to explain why we irrationally value anything, and that god is rather impersonal and powerless. Others are almost like Greek Heroes - God-Kings.

So...I don't know how the construction of a powerful entity would resolve a definition-based dilemma/disagreement. Is it made more clear in Sam's thought-problem, or did I misread the idea?

(I hope I did not come across negatively or dismissive, but am honestly confused as the solution seems like answering a circle with a square)