Deism vs. Atheism. Which is more likely true?

Argue for and against religions and philosophies which are not Christian

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 6143
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 84 times
Contact:

Deism vs. Atheism. Which is more likely true?

Post #1

Post by William »

Assuming for argument sake that it is possible for the universe to exist without intelligent design...

In what way is atheism still a better position to assume? In what way is atheism more likely to be truer than Deism?

One of the most popular arguments I ever come across for atheism over any type of theism usually goes along the lines of "if I were god, I would want to interact with my creation rather than stay absent like the Deistic god, and since there is no evidence of GOD existing through interaction, atheism is still the preferred position to have, because the deist GOD is absent anyway, so might as well not exist."

So, in what way is atheism more likely truer than Deism?

Or, are the two positions so similar that they are not even in conflict with each other and may as well be the same thing?

After all, a deist idea of GOD in relation to this universe, might as well not exist. Which is precisely the atheist position on the subject of GOD.

Thoughts?

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Deism vs. Atheism. Which is more likely true?

Post #2

Post by Divine Insight »

William wrote: In what way is atheism still a better position to assume? In what way is atheism more likely to be truer than Deism?

Thoughts?
The best argument I've heard from atheist philosophers and scientists goes as follows:

A very simple seed condition can give rise to "evolutionary behavior*" that can produce complex structures including sentient beings.

* Note: I'm using the phrase "evolutionary behavior" generically to address all types of physical evolution, not just biological evolution. In other words, even the chemistry of our universe appears to have "evolved" over time from a very simple starting condition to the complex chemical content the universe no contains.

How does this argument favor an atheistic worldview over a theistic one?

Well the argument is that a simple condition can give rise to everything we see including us. However, if we are going to postulate the existence of something as complex as a "God" (of any kind), we then have absolutely no explanation for how it came to be.

Because of this, a very simple, non intelligent and non-sentient condition is sufficient to explain everything we see. Postulating the existence of a more complex entity that actually created the original condition is simple superfluous (i.e. more than necessary).

So the idea that a simple condition gave rise to what we currently see seems like a more reasonable position than to postulate an unnecessarily complex entity that supposedly created a simple universe that evolves into a more complex system.

~~~~~

I totally agree with this view. Of course this doesn't clinch the case for atheism, but it does seem to be a very rational argument that atheism is a more "reasonable" position to take.

And that was the question right?

Any speculation for deism requires that a far more complex entity must exist prior to a simple universe evolving into a complex situation. I'm not sure if that even makes any sense.

Keep in mind that the original theists thought that their gods "created" everything by intervening design. But we now know that this isn't how the universe came to be. If there is some type of creator, that creator created an extremely simple initial condition that was then able to evolve into great complexity.

It just isn't logically reasonable to postulate that as a rational theory. Also note that this type of deity would go against every religious concept save for possibly deism itself. But deism is extremely close to atheist. Remember deists basically say that they know absolutely nothing about their imagined deity.

So how is deism much different from believing in a boogieman? I don't mean to make that comparison in a derogatory fashion. It's a serious question. There's just no rational reason to bother postulating the existence of an ill-defined, non-interacting, invisible, undetectable entity.

It's just a totally unnecessary hypothesis that doesn't add anything to what is already known. Atheism is the more reasonable assumption.

I totally agree with this, but I still remain agnostic in terms of the actual answer. Just because something is more reasonable doesn't make it true. :D

But as a reasonable assumption, atheism clearly wins.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 8914
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Deism vs. Atheism. Which is more likely true?

Post #3

Post by Bust Nak »

[Replying to post 1 by William]

A deistic universe operates exactly the same way as an atheistic universe would empirically. Atheism has one fewer assumption (or one fewer set of assumptions) than deism, and therefore should be preferred over deism according to the principle of parsimony.

In other words, yeah, a deist idea of GOD in relation to this universe, might as well not exist.

paarsurrey1
Sage
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:19 pm

Post #4

Post by paarsurrey1 »

Deism vs. Atheism. Which is more likely true?

We in Religion use the terms Believers-of-God and the others all are Non-Believers. Certainly Believers of God are true, I believe. There is no compulsion, however, to believe in Him, this choice has been given by Him, so we respect it. Right, please?
Regards

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 7 times

Post #5

Post by Divine Insight »

paarsurrey1 wrote: Deism vs. Atheism. Which is more likely true?

We in Religion use the terms Believers-of-God and the others all are Non-Believers. Certainly Believers of God are true, I believe. There is no compulsion, however, to believe in Him, this choice has been given by Him, so we respect it. Right, please?
Regards
I just came from another thread where a "Believer-of-God" said just the opposite. According to that poster God chooses who to reveal himself to. It's not up to us to chose to believe or not believe in God. That would be irrelevant.

So apparently "Believers-of-God" can't even agree on what that means. For some it means to believe in a God that has never revealed himself to them. For others, there's no point in believing in a God that hasn't reveled himself to us.

The only problem is that once a God has revealed himself to us there is no longer any choice whether or not to believe. So if that's the case, then belief cannot be a choice.

Belief can only be a choice for those who do not know that a God actually exists. So ironically only agnostics can choose to be "believers".
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

paarsurrey1
Sage
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:19 pm

Post #6

Post by paarsurrey1 »

Divine Insight wrote:
paarsurrey1 wrote: Deism vs. Atheism. Which is more likely true?

We in Religion use the terms Believers-of-God and the others all are Non-Believers. Certainly Believers of God are true, I believe. There is no compulsion, however, to believe in Him, this choice has been given by Him, so we respect it. Right, please?
Regards
I just came from another thread where a "Believer-of-God" said just the opposite. According to that poster God chooses who to reveal himself to. It's not up to us to chose to believe or not believe in God. That would be irrelevant.

So apparently "Believers-of-God" can't even agree on what that means. For some it means to believe in a God that has never revealed himself to them. For others, there's no point in believing in a God that hasn't reveled himself to us.

The only problem is that once a God has revealed himself to us there is no longer any choice whether or not to believe. So if that's the case, then belief cannot be a choice.

Belief can only be a choice for those who do not know that a God actually exists. So ironically only agnostics can choose to be "believers".
So apparently "Believers-of-God" can't even agree on what that means.


Does one want there should be compulsion one everybody to have one opinion,please?

Regards

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 7 times

Post #7

Post by Divine Insight »

paarsurrey1 wrote: Does one want there should be compulsion one everybody to have one opinion,please?

Regards
Only when they speak of themselves as belonging to a specific group (i.e. "Believers-of-God")

The moment they do that, they have committed themselves to belonging to a group.

In your previous post you said, "We in Religion". Does that include every religious person, or only those who hold opinions you personally approve of?

Please? :-k
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

paarsurrey1
Sage
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:19 pm

Post #8

Post by paarsurrey1 »

Divine Insight wrote:
paarsurrey1 wrote: Does one want there should be compulsion one everybody to have one opinion,please?

Regards
Only when they speak of themselves as belonging to a specific group (i.e. "Believers-of-God")

The moment they do that, they have committed themselves to belonging to a group.

In your previous post you said, "We in Religion". Does that include every religious person, or only those who hold opinions you personally approve of?

Please? :-k
Everybody who believes in the Truthful Religion, please.
Regards

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 7 times

Post #9

Post by Divine Insight »

paarsurrey1 wrote: Everybody who believes in the Truthful Religion, please.
Regards
Everyone who believes in a religion believes that their religion is the "Truthful" religion.

So apparently all religious folk are exactly alike. :D
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

paarsurrey1
Sage
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:19 pm

Post #10

Post by paarsurrey1 »

Divine Insight wrote:
paarsurrey1 wrote: Everybody who believes in the Truthful Religion, please.
Regards
Everyone who believes in a religion believes that their religion is the "Truthful" religion.

So apparently all religious folk are exactly alike. :D
Just like the Buddhism and Confucianism people, they are our brothers in humanity. Right, please?
Regards

Post Reply