RE: Why not deism?
October 2, 2019 at 12:18 am
(This post was last modified: October 2, 2019 at 12:22 am by GrandizerII.)
(October 1, 2019 at 9:12 pm)Inqwizitor Wrote: @Grandizer suggests that all logically possible worlds could be that explanation; but I think that goes beyond naturalism.
It's one alternative possible explanation, and I don't see how it must go beyond naturalism. It is possible for natural reality to be all there is and for its existence to be a logical/metaphysical necessity. You seem to be defining nature in a way that does not go beyond the observable subset of reality, but that doesn't necessarily make what's outside of this subset of reality spiritual or of a qualitatively different kind of reality.
The modal realist postulation should be seen as an extension of what we see, rather than a "beyond nature" kind of thing.
ETA: The point is you don't know whether nature is metaphysically contingent or not, and you shouldn't confidently make a statement like that.
