Am I a Deist? Cosmological Argument seems reasonable to me.

[Arkilogue]

This is one of the classic refutations that I just don't think it holds.

A god could come to existance without a prior cause because he would be able to do godlike shit like creating himself or some other magical and non-sensical stuff that natural things just can't do (or at least wouldn't be reasonable to expect they would)

While an universe coming into existance without a prior cause doesn't really make sense (not saying its impossible but I just don't think it would make any sense for it do suddenly come into existance)

Yeah, but what makes a god so special that it can exist outside the sum total of our reality? You see, as soon as you try to explain god as a special case you're automatically back in magical pixie dust land.

Not really. The sum total of "our reality" is dominated by space between stuff and movement of stuff and they had a beginning....the stuff didn't.

[Whateverist]

Anyways, my point was that wizards doing magic makes sense... something not-a-wizard doing magic makes no sense.

Why does wizards doing magic make sense?  Is it simply because you're more familiar with the concept of wizards?

I think he just means when you define things into being you should do so carefully so as not to leave any incongruities.

[robvalue]

Yeah, that's a false dichotomy. Even if that's the case, making sense to us isn't a requirement for truth.

I will have to think about that.

Do we have examples of things that are truth but make no sense?

Well... making no sense isn't an objective standard. Our human minds are limited and different. I would feel it's unreasonable to expect we would be able to make sense of everything that is true. We explore with scientific methods; that's all we can do really. We can't ever even establish truth; just reliable models. Truth that can be proved only exists in abstract systems.

There are things that are (probbaly) true which would have made no sense to anyone at certain points in history. Thus making sense is not a pre-requisite.

When it comes to the origins of our own reality, when viewed from a viewpoint vastly different from our own "trapped" one, I'd say it's extremely likely it wouldn't make sense to most people.

[InsaneDane]

But Deism renders any kind of religion or religious practice unnecessary, as the "divine entity" that created the universe uhm... "Doesn't give a fuck" about anything of this world.

Deism, in my opinion should really fall under Atheism, as a Deism can never be proven nor disproven as it present the universe as a fabricated product, equal to a Snickers bar.
And the Deist doesn't care for religious practice (?)

Is it anything but an observation/assumption that will never really have any use to mankind nor the believer?


Though Deism is far, far, far more valid than any Theistic belief, I just really don't see how the assumption that the universe was created by an unknown entity, then left to either work or collapse upon itself can really have or should have any meaning to any human being...


Maybe I'm just close-minded?

[robvalue]

Deism, basically, is two unecessary assumptions.

It assumes our reality had a cause. It assumes further that this cause was some sort of intelligent being.

You can get around this by using the word "God" so elastically that it is defined as "the cause of our reality, if there was one". In such a case, God can literally be nothing. Seems pretty pointless to me.

But yes, I would expect any deist to act exactly like an atheist in all practical regards.

[_Velvet_]

But Deism renders any kind of religion or religious practice unnecessary, as the "divine entity" that created the universe uhm... "Doesn't give a fuck" about anything of this world.

Deism, in my opinion should really fall under Atheism, as a Deism can never be proven nor disproven as it present the universe as a fabricated product, equal to a Snickers bar.
And the Deist doesn't care for religious practice (?)

Is it anything but an observation/assumption that will never really have any use to mankind nor the believer?


Though Deism is far, far, far more valid than any Theistic belief, I just really don't see how the assumption that the universe was created by an unknown entity, then left to either work or collapse upon itself can really have or should have any meaning to any human being...


Maybe I'm just close-minded?

Well, the idea its not necessarily that the cause doesn't give a fuck, it might or might not give a fuck, perhaps he is voyeur... yeah i'm joking well I just don't try to define it, I keep it as a cause, the unmoved mover, but I don't even go as far as attributing consciousness to it.

And when causes are all caused the next question would be what makes the first cause special? why/how the first cause its the first cause and not just another cause in the chain... how can it be?

Then you have
1: It causes itself, or it is its own cause (somehow, yeah I don't understand it neither, hence Wizard, cuz Wiz makes magic)
2: It just came to be with no reason (well normal things just don't do that, but perhaps magic? Hence Wizard)
3: It part of another kind of chain (hence multiverse, you are stil left with "ok what about the first then?")
4: Infinite Regression (as someone point out it doesn't really makes any less sense than the Wizard, but its a very unsettling thing to just accept)
5: The First cause its a natural one but it somehow defied what we know about how natural things behave (doesn't really makes any less sense than the wizard, to some makes even more sense as its, as some describe,a way less pretentious assumption)

Anyways whatever your pick theres no religion there to follow its just about trying to figure things out without (yet) having access to scientific data, either because you are ignorant of part of the data, or science itself its (still) ignorant about the question.

[GrandizerII]

But Deism renders any kind of religion or religious practice unnecessary, as the "divine entity" that created the universe uhm... "Doesn't give a fuck" about anything of this world.

Deism, in my opinion should really fall under Atheism, as a Deism can never be proven nor disproven as it present the universe as a fabricated product, equal to a Snickers bar.
And the Deist doesn't care for religious practice (?)

Is it anything but an observation/assumption that will never really have any use to mankind nor the believer?


Though Deism is far, far, far more valid than any Theistic belief, I just really don't see how the assumption that the universe was created by an unknown entity, then left to either work or collapse upon itself can really have or should have any meaning to any human being...


Maybe I'm just close-minded?

Well, the idea its not necessarily that the cause doesn't give a fuck, it might or might not give a fuck, perhaps he is voyeur... yeah i'm joking well I just don't try to define it, I keep it as a cause.

And when causes are all caused the next question would be what makes the first cause special? why/how the first cause its the first cause and not just another cause in the chain... how it can be?

Then you have
1: It causes itself, or it is its own cause (somehow, yeah I also have no idea, hence Wizard, cuz Wiz makes magic)
2: It just came to be with no reason (well normal things just don't do that, but perhaps magic? Hence Wizard)
3: It part of another kind of chain (hence multiverse, you are stil left with "ok what about the first then?")
4: Infinite Regression (as someone point out it doesn't really makes any less sense than the Wizard, but its a very unsettling thing to just accept)
5: The First cause its a natural one but it somehow defied what we know about how natural things behave (doesn't really makes any less sense than the wizard, to some makes even more sense as its, as some describe, way less pretenrious assumption)

Anyways whatever your pick theres no religion there to follow its just about trying to figure things out without (yet) having access to scientific data, either because you are ignorant of part of the data, or science itself its (still) ignorant about the question.

What makes the universe normal anyway?

[robvalue]

Right, and what is magic? I'd be interested in anyone trying to define magic without committing equivocation fallacies. Same with "supernatural".

I angrily explain this point below.

https://youtu.be/J5u5-Bg2ENQ

[_Velvet_]

Right, and what is magic? I'd be interested in anyone trying to define magic without committing equivocation fallacies. Same with "supernatural".

I angrily explain this point below.

https://youtu.be/J5u5-Bg2ENQ

Well when I say magic its really not related to god of the gaps as your video seemed to imply.

The universe its bounded by some laws (that are dictated by its own nature and observed by us), when those laws are suspended I would call the magic, supernatural to me its indeed what you explained, something not yet explained and (still) considered magic.

While you do point that we don't know those laws, we only know our models, and those are especially unreliable when talking about the time very very close to big bang or anything before it (if there's something), I still would still think its reasonable to think that things having reason its right.

Even if I'm not absolutelly sure of it, I argue only that its reasonable to expect things to have a cause, and the first cause to be somehow different from the others.

If your position its to not make a stand on the origins of the universe unless you are sure of it, then ok.

But I think we probably will not ever be sure of it, so might as well determine the most reasonable explanation (and not just assume it truth, but just determine it as the most reasonable explanation)

[robvalue]

Things having reasons? What does that mean?

If something breaks the law of nature, how is it a law? It's just wrong to begin with, no? Or the law applies differently to things in group A than in group B. I think you're trying to say it does the impossible. See the problem?

Sure, you can expect things to have a cause. You end up with infinite regression or a circle, usually; unless you just special plead an exception to your own idea.