(November 17, 2018 at 5:41 am)Azu Wrote: What's your definition of god?
Usually I leave that in the hands of the people trying to argue that a god (theirs, specifically) exists. To do otherwise would be a strawman. They get to define their position, not me.
That said, I will feel willing to call bullshit if what they are describing is so alien from the common usage of the word that calling it a god has no purpose other than confusing people with the choice of terminology. So I guess I'll share kinda where my boundaries fall on that.
A god must be...
1) an entity with a mind, including things like desires and preferences, memories, a thought process, planning ability, a sense of self distinct from the rest of the universe, and so forth. So, no taking "God is love" literally as a way that proving God exists.
2) capable of exercising power that supersedes the natural order, eg the laws of physics. (I'll allow deist gods that once exercised such power but no longer do.)
There's probably more qualifiers I should throw out there. As is, some sort of wizard would qualify. But frankly just that much would be enough for me to seriously reevaluate my view of the world, so no need to place the bar higher. If someone can show that much I'd have to sit down and have a serious think about it.
Being an antipistevist is like being an antipastovist, only with epistemic responsibility instead of bruschetta.
Ignore list includes: 1 douche bag (Drich)
Ignore list includes: 1 douche bag (Drich)