This puts me in mind of the (probably apocryphal) exchange between Napoleon and Laplace. When the emperor asked the astronomer/mathematician why his recent work on the solar system contained no mention of God, Laplace answered, 'I had no need of that hypothesis.'
It strikes me that adding God to the admittedly thorny problem of explaining the interworking of brute facts adds - quite literally - nothing. If the sensible world does indeed lie within a larger reality, what is accomplished by labeling that reality 'God'? Why is the term 'informing principle' more useful than the term 'physical laws'?
Boru
It strikes me that adding God to the admittedly thorny problem of explaining the interworking of brute facts adds - quite literally - nothing. If the sensible world does indeed lie within a larger reality, what is accomplished by labeling that reality 'God'? Why is the term 'informing principle' more useful than the term 'physical laws'?
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax