FallentoReason 2.0

[FallentoReason]

@FTR
The conditions for all of the laws. Well, that's not incredibly specific. But that's okay. What about those conditions for all the laws required divine tinkering? Further, if we look down there are at least some laws you've exempted, specifically natural laws that are the mechanisms of evolution. Why are these laws not the tinkered laws?

Well the Deistic assumption is that it all eventually came from this divine being thing, so the reason for the forces of nature being the way they are is because they were made to be that way. So from the big bag, matter was going to act according to the laws that were set in place, eventually giving us a universe that we observe today. I don't really know how else to explain it...

As for evolution, I think it's all supported by "simpler" laws that made evolution possible in the first place via laws of physics etc...

Still wondering about evidence btw.

There's none to be found. Only reasoning based on what we observe today.

Arguably, my recent inclinations towards concluding that there's a greater being in a different dimension are affected by my "biological bias" where my cognition simply makes me arrive at this conclusion because I'm exposed to a world where the "painting" required a "painter". Or, I'm correct in being able to extrapolate what I observe and coming to a conclusion that is more or less true. I don't know which one it is, but all I have is my own thoughts and my surroundings as they are, but no evidence.

I should have clarified more thoroughly what I meant by the drugs thing. So, in this day and age, it so happens that our bodies can't deal with certain substances i.e. drugs. I'm not saying that the Creator pre-defined everything so that 13.7 billion years into the universe we would be sitting here unable to consume drugs. Quite clearly, evolution is random and it could very well have turned out that we couldn't consume e.g. corn or something. Never was any of this planned out though. All I'm saying is that science can be used to understand what works and what doesn't in our current evolutionary state.

I wanted to set this right next to the statement that drew me in

To the contrary, I find that my Deistic inclinations enhance my experiences with reality. For example, the evidence shows that most drugs will destroy your body one way or another. That in itself is obviously something to take away and remember, but to me it's like the Creator is speaking and saying there's reason not to take those drugs because our bodies were never meant to be treated that way.

Now......I'm having trouble figuring out how the one statement (in bold) doesn't completely rob the other statement (in bold) of meaning. If nothing was planned out, if this particular expression of natural law is random and not tinkered with (even if others were - and I'll be honest...that would still be troubling-) then what exactly does it mean to have "meant" anything? Our bodies never having been "meant" for this or that? Onward and upward.

Yeah, good point. I'll let you know right now that I'm fairly new to Deism and I haven't figured it out enough to explain myself coherently. Therefore I will most likely say things that contradict without realising, but that's ok because then you guys can help me see that and I can refine better what's logical and what isn't (in a philosophical sense more than anything... I think).

When I said "our bodies were never meant to be treated that way" I'm specifically speaking about this day and age. As of right now, our bodies can't cope with some substances. But like I said in the other bolded bit, this triviality (and I mean that in every sense of the word) about life wasn't planned out because I'm pretty sure that would imply this Creator stuck his supernatural hand into the natural world and messed around with it.

I think the "never" came from a place within me (like a gut feeling) that tells me science is saying I should not treat my body that way. The atheist might think, "yeah, I'm aware of that, but this is it. This is all there is and so I will choose whether I do drugs or not, because I might choose to live my only life in that way" which to me is fine I guess, but the "never" I speak of is not time related, but rather... hmm... let me try this: because science can be said that it is the tool to observe what was created by the Creator (in a Desitic framework of course), then it would make sense to trust that "science knows best". So the chemicals in drugs and our bodily composition were never meant to be together. No matter what the circumstance, the combination of those two will produce a negative effect (in light of evolution and wanting to survive). So I think the subtlety there with the "never" was that I was speaking in a scientific sense, that because of the way nature turned out to be, we can conclude that certain things will always consistently give us the same results.

Does that sort of clear up your question?

What I'm saying is that if there is a Creator, then it's logical to me that we can observe and experiment with the stuff it left behind to ultimately understand how to live better.

What about there being a creator would make that logical. Maybe the creator fucking hates you, and takes delight in watching you suffer. Maybe it set the all those laws for the purpose of a divine snuff film. Firstly, nothing that you wrote follows from "if there is a creator". Secondly, if we just removed the creator bit and all reference to it then is it somehow less logical to leverage and utilize the world around us " to ultimately understand how to live better" In this instance, like the other, the creator bit is bare assertion, nothing follows from it, and it is not required. Save yourself a step.

[/quote]

I think the above helps summarise what I see as the motivation behind wanting to use nature to our advantage. I think Deism in a way makes me take scientific discoveries more seriously because if we assume science is our way to understand what the Creator left behind, then there's hope(?) that it will show us the way to live as best we can. The atheist can obviously do the same without believing in a creator, but I can't help but see a more nihilistic outcome of "so what if (e.g.) drugs are bad"? To me, it's like there's someone out there saying "I told you so!" when I don't listen to what we have discovered, and that in a way gives me direction for my life. Call it a sort of placebo if you have to, because that could very well be the case I suppose.