Subject:
|
Re: WMD, again...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 22 Apr 2003 03:15:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
364 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> > In that case I'd probably be more kindly disposed to at least one
> > Christian (thereafter referred to as my benefactor)!
>
> A-ha! If *I* did send a windfall your way, no way would I take credit-- I'd
> sign the card "from God, to Dave!" :-)
Does He have to use stamps, or does he just create the card in my mailbox?
> Whoa, you lost me. Are you saying that it is possible for an Atheist to accept
> the existence of a God?
I think so (though not for me personally). I think the deal is that the
atheist doesn't worship the god in question. Maybe this analogy would work: I
believe in (ie, accept the existence of) Christianity, but I don't follow it.
In other words, I can accept the existence of a thing without subscribing
to/worshiping the thing. I don't know for sure, though; there's probably a
better term for what I'm describing, and in any case I wouldn't want to speak
on behalf of all atheists!
By the way, in this context I'm using the generic lower-case god to avoid
singling-out any particular deity.
> I suspected as much, that Atheism and Deism were similar. Neither
> acknowledges that the existence of God is provable, yet a Deist believes anyway
> (leap of faith). Now it seems to me that an Atheist also takes a leap of faith
> of sorts by not believing in something that is by definition unprovable.
That's one kind, which I believe is referred to as "Hard Atheism[1]" Another
kind simply doesn't make the leap, in effect saying "I believe in this much
(the natural universe) but not beyond that." This, I think, is "Soft
Atheism[2]" Another spin is to say that, lacking evidence to support belief in
a god, I am not able to accept the existence of a god (this is kind of where I
stand). Agnosticism, of course, basically says "the jury's still out," which is
a reasonable belief in itself.
I think Deism suffered one serious blow when Hume came on the scene, and
Darwin was another; prior to that time, it seemed unthinkable that man could be
here without akind of prime source, and some people therefore posited a
minimally-intrusive god. After Darwin, the possibility of man's development
from other species explained (at least theoretically) where we came from, but
not the first "spark." This retreating position of the divine--that is, by
relegating the deity to the ever-decreasing realm of the unknown--is known as
the "god of the gaps" [in our understanding] argument. The problem,
rhetorically, is that eventually the infinite will be confined to some
Planck-length subatomic unit of space!
> whether one believes in God or not is a sort of toss up-- Deists seem to me
> to be Atheists who accept the existence of God and not much else without any
> justifiable reason other than, as you mentioned, personal comfort level.
>
> I guess my question for you and other Atheists would be: why choose Atheism and
> not Deism?
A good question. Maybe one way to think of it is to say: "Given that the
universe could arguably have come into existence without divine intervention,
is it necessary to posit a deity in addition to the universe itself?" If one's
response is "no," then atheism may be a satisfactory response. If one is
uncomfortable with that answer, requiring or preferring the existence of a
deity--at least at the outset--then perhaps Deism (or some species thereof) is
more suitable.
Dave!
[1] With apologies to Suz for my language
[2] These terms are used in discussion but shouldn't be taken as the "real"
names for these kinds of atheism. Just useful ways of referring to it.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: WMD, again...
|
| (...) I think you are confusing atheism, which is to not believe in any god or spiritual entity like gogs, with agnostism. Agnostic people just don't care for religion, but they may believe or not that a God exists. As for you, who believes in (...) (22 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: WMD, again...
|
| (...) A-ha! If *I* did send a windfall your way, no way would I take credit-- I'd sign the card "from God, to Dave!" :-) (...) Whoa, you lost me. Are you saying that it is possible for an Atheist to accept the existence of a God? (...) Thank you. I (...) (22 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
35 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
