RE: Non-religious Theism
April 20, 2014 at 9:01 am
(This post was last modified: April 20, 2014 at 9:03 am by Cato.)
On the surface I typically don't take great issue with deists since deists argue for a an agent responsible for the Big Bang and I suspend judgement. With that as the only difference we can get on with trying to make things a little better for humanity without the chains of doctrine and superstition.
My philosophical disagreements with the prime mover argument is that it doesn't explain anything, adds an entity that isn't necessarily needed, and raises more questions. Even if I assume a prime mover there is no way of knowing that the prime mover was directly responsible for the Big Bang; perhaps the prime mover is further back in the causal chain. How did the prime mover cause the Big Bang? Does the prime mover create other universes? Does the prime mover do anything else?
You're new here. Just wanted to let you know that a moderator will likely move this thread. This specific forum is typically reserved for items pertaining to operation of af.org.
My philosophical disagreements with the prime mover argument is that it doesn't explain anything, adds an entity that isn't necessarily needed, and raises more questions. Even if I assume a prime mover there is no way of knowing that the prime mover was directly responsible for the Big Bang; perhaps the prime mover is further back in the causal chain. How did the prime mover cause the Big Bang? Does the prime mover create other universes? Does the prime mover do anything else?
You're new here. Just wanted to let you know that a moderator will likely move this thread. This specific forum is typically reserved for items pertaining to operation of af.org.
