Deism

[JesusHChrist]

I have a soft spot for Thomas Jefferson, who liked the words of Jesus, but who also liked the words of Plato and Socrates. But if he were alive today, as much as a deist he was, I would still tell him flat out to his face, "YOU CANT WATER IT DOWN AND MAKE IT WORK".

Given his science/empirical bent, I would think Jefferson would be an atheist if he lived today.

[Rampant.A.I.]

But at that point, why even call it god?

Because of what I wrote:

...I observe the universe and I see a grand machine. I reflect on the development of human evolution, including not just the enlarging cranial capacity but all the other things that came together which made our civilization possible, and I see intent.

The philosophical distinction with atheism is whether or not there's anything at the wheel of this car. Maybe I'm wrong and we hit the cosmic lottery. I think one indication might be once we venture out there if we find much in the way of intelligent life and other civilizations. For the deist model to hold, I would expect we'd find we're not the only petri dish in God's lab. If it is just us, the cosmic lottery looks like a stronger explanation.

By the way, I often use the petri dish analogy to communicate what I think is a more believable scenario where God exists. I joke about the two bacteria cells talking to each other and one says, "let me tell you about the personal relationship I have with The Great Labcoat in the sky."

This reminds me of some of my previous deist/borderline pantheist beliefs. Many historical western religious traditions assumed it was blasphemous to claim to know anything about the nature of God by methods other than negative ascription.

[DeistPaladin]

I don't disagree with your second sentence, it's the first one that I don't get. What does the existence of life elsewhere have to do with deism? What bearing does it have?

"If it is just us, it's an awful waste of space." -Contact.

I also see "the cosmic lottery" as an alternate hypothesis. If there is no other intelligent life out there, it looks increasingly plausible that we simply lucked out to have the environment and evolutionary turns to get as far as we have.

[Rampant.A.I.]

I don't disagree with your second sentence, it's the first one that I don't get. What does the existence of life elsewhere have to do with deism? What bearing does it have?

"If it is just us, it's an awful waste of space." -Contact.

I also see "the cosmic lottery" as an alternate hypothesis. If there is no other intelligent life out there, it looks increasingly plausible that we simply lucked out to have the environment and evolutionary turns to get as far as we have.

It would imply a statistical improbability. and therefore a lack of intelligent design.

[Brian37]

I have a soft spot for Thomas Jefferson, who liked the words of Jesus, but who also liked the words of Plato and Socrates. But if he were alive today, as much as a deist he was, I would still tell him flat out to his face, "YOU CANT WATER IT DOWN AND MAKE IT WORK".

Given his science/empirical bent, I would think Jefferson would be an atheist if he lived today.

That isn't a given, but yea, out of all the people back then it wouldn't shock me if he were alive today said to himself "You know what, you atheists are right, what the fuck was I thinking?"

This same guy also said "Whence arises the morality of the atheist? It is idol to say, as some do, that no such thing exists."

Not to mention, "Question with boldness even the existence of a god, for if there be one, surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear."

One thing he certainly was not frightened of was skepticism.

[Napoléon]

It would imply a statistical improbability. and therefore a lack of intelligent design.

But some of the religious would use it as evidence that life is so fine tuned on this earth alone, pointing towards a creator? Isn't it amazing how god created one world in all the billions? You could point to a creator in both scenarios, that we are alone or surrounded by life makes no difference as far as I'm concerned.

[Brian37]

It would imply a statistical improbability. and therefore a lack of intelligent design.

But some of the religious would use it as evidence that life is so fine tuned on this earth alone, pointing towards a creator? Isn't it amazing how god created one world in all the billions? You could point to a creator in both scenarios, that we are alone or surrounded by life makes no difference as far as I'm concerned.

"Fine tuned" is a bullshit argument. Our flawed bodies are so "fine tuned" we can get cancer and be killed by a nano sized bacteria. The universe is so "fine tuned" meteors have hit our planet and will do so again in the future.

The laws of nature are why we are here and the only thing that we can say about our existence is that we are lucky, if you want to call all all the horrific disease, famine crime and war "luck".

Believers simply do not want to face their own finite existence. They do not want to face that the universe was around 14 billion years prior to humans. They do not want to face that our planet's core will run out of energy, and the more likely odds of another meteor hitting us prior to that. They ignore that after our planet dies all life will go extinct, and our sun will die as well. And the universe will continue with no record of our existence.

The biggest problem humans have is their own hubris.

[Autumnlicious]

The anthropic principle is bullshit too.

Take a look anywhere else in the cosmos and you realize how dependent we are on our tiny box of a planet.

For a universe biased towards "intelligent life", it seems awfully intent on being inhospitable.