(July 14, 2017 at 7:55 am)Lutrinae Wrote: This morning I am trying to sleep. My cat is making a bunch of noise.
I open my eyes to look at what she is doing and it appears she has discovered something that crawled in here, possibly a lizard.
I ignore that she is causing harm to another living thing, because it is in her cat nature to hunt. I do not try to stop her from doing what she is doing.
As I close my eyes to lay back down to go back to sleep, it occurs to me that in the above scenario what if I am god and my cat is a human harming another human?
Perhaps god does not intervene to stop human on human violence because he simply does not care about what is happening with us, perhaps god views it as our nature as human beings to act as we do and finds it pointless to intervene in any way. He is nothing more than a sometimes spectator of the lives far removed from his own nature, much in the way a typical human is uninterested in the lives of ants.
If god is real, which I still doubt, this is a more credible understanding of god's unknowable nature than that of the theistic point of view.
"He" is nothing more than the male in our species evolutionary narcissism, but not just in modern monotheism, but in all of antiquity. Our species evolved without a modern understanding of evolutionary biology. "He" is simply a presumption in comic book form stemming from the false notion of antiquity that brawn was a better attribute than nurture. While polytheism did incorporate more female figures, you still have in polytheism the top deities being male and most of the deities being male.
What you are doing here is attempting to avoid the standard monotheism by watering that "he" down to deism. The idea that a male figure god started everything but didn't do anything afterwords. Deism isn't new, it has been an idea that has existed for centuries.
I do not see deism as anymore credible than specific monotheism. I held this position myself for a while leaving the Christian monotheism for years, but eventually saw this as being simply a watered down version attempting to avoid the pratfalls of popular mythology.
It is really simple to me. If one can accept that the God's of Abraham who do get involved according to the followers, are made up, and you can accept there is a natural cause to lightening not needing Thor as the cognition, and you can accept Hurricanes are not started by Poseidon, then I also don't see a "cosmic lab boss" as any less of a gap answer.
There is no need for a super cognition as a starting point. We are an outcome of of natural processes, not ants in an ant farm. Even the idea of a guy who got the ball rolling but did nothing after would still suffer the problem of infinite regress as much as a specific god claim, and Ocham's razor would kill even a generic concept.
Stephen Hawking in any case, "A God is not required".
