A troubling trifling alias god

God = {.}

Once we got the beginning correct everything else should follow from it; right?  Let’s look at, say, a set of few hundred people, a Tribe, who have been too nice to their invaders mistaking them for guests (Atithi Devo Bhava /\) and got more or less wiped-out-of-the-face-of-earth.  Oh well, the few that are left in the set are resigned to praying to God, which looks like arrows pointing from each member of the Tribe to the only element of the set God.  Then there are castes which have been ruthless in the practice and perfection of their tribal instincts and naturally they prospered to great numbers.  However this set Caste is no different from the set Tribe notwithstanding the numerical difference in that all arrows from the members of Caste all point to the only element in God.  It’s exactly for this reason that we call God a Terminal object (satisfying universal mapping property).  I am in a rush to go somewhere, so let me cut to the chase: there’s only one function from any set [no matter its size] to the set God.  This accounts for the trifle, but where’s the trouble, you ask.  The other side of God is Blessing: God is in each and every one of us, though not in the same way, which translates to something like there are as many functions from the domain set God = {.} to a codomain set (tribe, religion, nation, mental institution, you pick…) as the number of members in the codomain set.  If nothing else, God got the count right!

This is how far I got in my reading of Cantor’s theorem (1st sentence in Binary operations and diagonal arguments, Conceptual Mathematics, page 303 – ).  I will try to pick up the pace.