Why are deists so annoying?

[Napoléon]

That would only be intellectual dishonesty if I claimed something about my reasoning that was untrue. As I have not done this, I don't meet the definition either in the definition of fallacious reasoning or in the spirit of the term.

I fully explained why I thought you were being intellectually dishonest and I think I did a bloody good job. If you still insist you're not being so, then, well, you just have an entirely different understanding of the term to me.

Smells awfully like you want to believe to me. Do you not think so?

I'm curious as to what motive you would ascribe. That would be a good first step. What comfort comes from deism?

You tell me, you're the deist.

This is precisely why I think you're being intellectually dishonest. Can you honestly not understand why I find your belief in a god perplexing?

That you are perplexed by or don't share my beliefs =/= me being dishonest.

Totally not the point I was making. Taking my words out of context and construing them to fit your own purposes, hmm, sounds like something that has a term...

Instinct? Just seems like a cop out for not properly explaining your thought process.

Why?

Why? Because what does it even mean? That's why.

I believe in a flying unicorn that orbits the sun. I believe it because instinct tells me so.

Would you not think I was being stupid for thinking that? Would you not think my reasoning is faulty?

You constantly saying "instinct" is like a blanket term for "I can't be arsed to explain my reasoning".

You must have some kind of reasoning that can be better explained than simply "instinct". People don't just believe things for no reason. Even if the reasons are faulty.

You know what you believe is being irrational. But you believe it anyway.

Instinctive.

WHAT. DOES. THIS. EVEN. MEAN.

I make a distinction between "without reason" and "against reason".

Right, best bit of information I've got here.

But I still don't understand why you think it's necessary to have a belief, in spite of one or the other.

Do you honestly think I don't understand that, give me some credit here.

The acceptance of the assertion that beliefs don't require evidence, that evidence or other reasons are only required when you wish others to believe as you do, seems to fly in the face of the rest of your post. That you not only accept it, but do so with the "you don't say" meme, only underscores the apparent paradox.

Now I'm perplexed.

Misrepresented what I said, again.

This has nothing to do with you using evidence. I couldn't care less about evidence, I'm not trying to actually establish the validity of a deistic god. This is where I think Jenny also misunderstood my intentions. That isn't what this is about.

What I've been trying to get at, if it isn't already obvious (and I really think it has been obvious) is why you believe what you believe. I'm not asking for evidence. I'm asking for reasoning. All you've given so far, is "instinct". Fucking lame ass, lazy, explains-nothing reasoning IMHO.

Why then, do you not believe in a flying teapot orbiting Mars?

What role would the teapot serve?

We're yet to establish that a deistic god serves any purpose or needs to serve a purpose, so why believe in that?

Why is rationality important to you when discrediting theistic gods, but not a deistic one.

The reasons are legion, including both practical consequences and positive claims that can be checked. Elaborating fully would require its own thread but can I trust that's not necessary?

You're missing the point. Neither a theistic god or deistic one is required. Yet you still believe in one. Why do you apply rational reasoning to one assertion but not the other. The answer isn't apparent to me, nor can I imagine for many other actual atheists.

Instinct how?

Good question. Perhaps neuroscience will one day have an answer.

So, it boils down to, "I don't know"/"I can't really give a satisfactory answer".

Isn't that exactly what I said would happen on the first page?

Call them out on it and they usually just say "It's something I can't quite describe".

Yeah, this has been a really pointless exercise. Guess I only have myself to blame.

---

Because we're not rational

Speak for yourself!