Deism for non-believers

[Angrboda]

I wasn't claiming you believed any particular thing beyond that there is a devil and the deep blue sea problem with Deism.

If we follow the logic of the No Free Lunch theorem with respect to evolutionary algorithms, and don't bind our notion of a Deist god by the shell of the past, the probability ends up being that the most likely god is of the Lovecraftian sort, about which we're probably better off not knowing.

Did you ever pause to consider how many more malevolent and evil gods are compatible with the world we see, than any gods possessed of good nature?

In a sense, I see Deism falling into the same trap as agnosticism — attempting to break free of tradition only to create a new tradition that is a synthesis of the old and some noble sentiments; they never reach escape velocity to break free of the problems of the past. Just ask yourself which Deist god is more probable, the impersonal shadow of Christianity, or my blessed Kali who orders the warp and rhythm of creation. Did you ever consider Shaktism as an equally plausible alternative to your Deism? If not, why not?

I think what is key here is dropping any preconceived ideas of what a 'god' is. If anything, the gods of religions are all pretty much at the material extreme of my scale and if defined entirely by their 'chosen' peoples (which rarely happens...), they could be shown to be non-existent. I think the plausible gods aren't necessarily thinking beings with masterplans, but something even more 'basic' than that.

"I believe in God, only I spell it Nature."
— Frank Lloyd Wright

As noted, this is trending towards irrelevancies. It's consistent with the laws of physics as we understand them for there to be several billion universes just like our own, coexisting in the same space as our own, so long as none of the existents in a particular universe interact in any way with those in another. Is this possible? Sure is. Would it matter if it was true? I think you're equivocating on the meaning of matter; if a Deist god is indistinguishable from nature, or existentially irrelevant, in what sense do they matter.

In a sense this is like Tillich's definition of God as "the ground of being". It's an impressive phrase, but what does it really mean? What conclusions can you draw from this that you couldn't have drawn without it? Nothing? Everything?

Sorry, but to me, Deism smacks of replacing your long lost Teddy Bear of childhood with an ethereal ever-present but untouchable substitute. And to me, that smells like an emotional cop-out.