Posts: 1114
Threads: 28
Joined: June 13, 2011
Reputation:
18
Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism
February 24, 2015 at 7:37 pm
http://infidels.org/library/modern/micha...n/gap.html
Quote:But however a First Cause is conceived, it need not be the theistic God: all of these conclusions are compatible with deism and with an impersonal God.
Quote:The rejection of Darwinian evolution is compatible with deism, polytheism, and a finite God view.
I found that to be the most interesting part of his essay because it undermines the fundies' motivation for anti-evolution.
Hitchens and others have made this point many times and I think this point can't be stressed enough. The best arguments for a god do not lead to religious theism at all.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
Posts: 8711
Threads: 128
Joined: March 1, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism
February 24, 2015 at 9:10 pm
You are correct that the First Cause 'only' establishes a deistic or impersonal God. Additional arguments, like Aquinas's Fifth way flesh out the rest.
Posts: 1114
Threads: 28
Joined: June 13, 2011
Reputation:
18
RE: Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism
February 25, 2015 at 12:16 am
Not really. Fifth way just shows a God that designed the universe for some goal. You would have to argue that the sources for the Bible are highly likely to be reliable, which is a fool's errand. You can't just assume the bible as highly reliable merely because they are all we got on the subject of Jesus. Ancient anecdotal evidence is weak. But even if for argument's sake a secular theist assumes Christ was resurrected by God it can't just be assume the Christian God did it since another God, or Goddess for that matter, could have done it, perhaps for a joke. If we compare secular theism to religious theism occam's razor would narrow it down to secular theism. Why? Because religious theism is a large complex of many claims that all require proof and/or evidence while secular theism is based on fewer claims and requires less argument to defend. A secular theist could not have to interpret and defend religious doctrine while the religious do.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism
February 25, 2015 at 1:44 am
(This post was last modified: February 25, 2015 at 1:45 am by robvalue.)
I totally agree. Deism, or non-religious theism are by far the most rational forms of theism. If you feel that there is some sort of God, then going beyond that to "know" all this stuff about it based on books and oral myths is just storytelling. I suppose people want a god they can relate to, so they give it a human character and a backstory. It would be great if people did not feel the need to do this, and to presume to speak for the intentions of this intelligence, if it exists (or did exist).
And for sure, this type of theism is much easier to defend than religious claims, which just throw non sequiturs everywhere and rely on "faith" (accepting things as true based on no evidence). It is also far less harmful.
Posts: 1114
Threads: 28
Joined: June 13, 2011
Reputation:
18
RE: Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism
February 25, 2015 at 2:15 am
(This post was last modified: February 25, 2015 at 2:17 am by Pizza.)
To be clearer, I'm not saying the Christian God is complex, I'm saying the group of claims which makes up Christian theism are many. I want to bite any "b-b-ut God is simple!" objection to occam's razor in the butt before anyone replies with one. I'm not talking about God I'm talking about sets of propositions. Occam's razor is to be applied to propositions just like how logic applies to propositions and not cats.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
Posts: 6610
Threads: 73
Joined: May 31, 2014
Reputation:
56
RE: Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism
February 25, 2015 at 3:59 am
(February 24, 2015 at 9:10 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: You are correct that the First Cause 'only' establishes a deistic or impersonal God. Additional arguments, like Aquinas's Fifth way flesh out the rest.
I disagree that the First Cause establishes some sentient divine being. Lots of other possibilities to consider.
Posts: 18510
Threads: 129
Joined: January 19, 2014
Reputation:
91
RE: Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism
February 25, 2015 at 4:09 am
(February 24, 2015 at 9:10 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: You are correct that the First Cause 'only' establishes a deistic or impersonal God. Additional arguments, like Aquinas's Fifth way flesh out the rest.
No it doesn't. The first cause "argument" is absolutely meaningless. It establishes the obvious, namely the universe
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
Posts: 1114
Threads: 28
Joined: June 13, 2011
Reputation:
18
RE: Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism
February 25, 2015 at 4:11 am
The first cause could be an universe that has different laws than our universe; thus, that universe doesn't need a cause nor an explanation like things in this universe. Other natural laws are possible.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism
February 25, 2015 at 4:26 am
(This post was last modified: February 25, 2015 at 4:27 am by robvalue.)
We're not going to be fooled by this sleight of hand trick where "cause" gets switched out for "intelligent being", then when we're not looking it's changed to "God", and finally the God has a name and a story book. That's three non sequiturs in a row, following an invalid argument to begin with. It couldn't be further from demonstrating what people want it to.
True things don't need all this bullshit trickery.
Posts: 18510
Threads: 129
Joined: January 19, 2014
Reputation:
91
RE: Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism
February 25, 2015 at 4:48 am
(February 25, 2015 at 4:11 am)Pizz-atheist Wrote: The first cause could be an universe that has different laws than our universe; thus, that universe doesn't need a cause nor an explanation like things in this universe. Other natural laws are possible.
Not even that, the first cause is simply not necessary, because it isn't really defined and it doesn't solve anything imnsho
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
|
