Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 61 (9209 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: The Rutificador chile
Post Volume: Total: 919,503 Year: 6,760/9,624 Month: 100/238 Week: 17/83 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Percy is a Deist - Now what's the difference between a deist and an atheist?
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3971
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 7.1


Message 16 of 375 (498372)
02-09-2009 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by RAZD
02-09-2009 10:06 PM


Re: Theism, Deism, and Atheism/Agnosticism
contradicts or is contradicted by
I didn't see those at all as contradictions, rather, they were two ways of saying the same thing.
Unless that 0.1% is more important than the other 99.9% - in which case it isn't 0.1% ...
I gave those arbitrary values for "starting the universe" versus "everything that happened since said start". From the theist perspective, I would think that "starting the universe" is a relatively very small part of the collected "works of God".
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by RAZD, posted 02-09-2009 10:06 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by RAZD, posted 02-09-2009 10:40 PM Minnemooseus has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1662 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 17 of 375 (498373)
02-09-2009 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Minnemooseus
02-09-2009 10:18 PM


Re: Theism, Deism, and Atheism/Agnosticism
I didn't see those at all as contradictions, rather, they were two ways of saying the same thing.
If 0.1% theism is the biggest rival of theism, then why wouldn't 0% theism be bigger? If atheism is not a bigger rival then that small difference is critical.
I gave those arbitrary values for "starting the universe" versus "everything that happened since said start".
The problem here, is that the universe was created at the start to cause "everything that happened since said start" and thus it is also included in the package.
From the theist perspective, I would think that "starting the universe" is a relatively very small part of the collected "works of God".
Yet we only know one very small portion of one part of the curriculum vitae, and you assume theists know the rest?
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : rest

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Minnemooseus, posted 02-09-2009 10:18 PM Minnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Minnemooseus, posted 02-09-2009 11:12 PM RAZD has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3971
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 7.1


Message 18 of 375 (498375)
02-09-2009 11:12 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by RAZD
02-09-2009 10:40 PM


Re: Theism, Deism, and Atheism/Agnosticism
If 0.1% theism is the biggest rival of theism, then why wouldn't 0% theism be bigger? If atheism is not a bigger rival then that small difference is critical.
The quote is:
quote:
In Western society, one of theism’s strongest rivals, historically speaking, has been deism.
It does not say deism is THE strongest/biggest rival - It says ONE OF the strongest rivals. Certainly, now atheism is a stronger and more prominent rival - How much of the general population has any idea of what deism is? Before my participation in , I had never heard of such a thing.
Also, they say "historically". At the beginnings of the United States, wasn't deism a big thing? And atheism probably a small thing?
The essence of it all is, I'm calling deism to be essentially the same thing as agnosticism and/or atheism. To what degree that is true is the topic title question.
The problem here, is that the universe was created at the start to cause "everything that happened since said start" and thus it is also included in the package.
You seem to be saying God had things preprogrammed towards exactly the results we now have. He did not at all "roll the dice". God could start the universe again and have things replay the exact same way.
That sure sounds like a micro-manager God - Highly theistic and not what I understand to be deistic.
...and you assume theists know the rest?
Theistic extremists do come off a being highly non-agnostic. I think they're wrong, and most any thinking and honest theist would have a fair chunk of agnostic in him or her. A deist does have that big chuck of agnostic in him or her.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by RAZD, posted 02-09-2009 10:40 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by RAZD, posted 02-10-2009 7:13 AM Minnemooseus has not replied
 Message 41 by RAZD, posted 02-10-2009 9:35 PM Minnemooseus has replied

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2734 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 19 of 375 (498390)
02-10-2009 6:03 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by RAZD
02-09-2009 8:51 PM


RAZD writes:
The atheist believes there is no evidence of god/s and that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence (all A is B, B therefore A logical fallacy).
We're often told by theists (and deists are a sub-category of theists) what atheists believe. In fact, an atheist is just anyone who lacks Faith/belief in any gods. In the same way that a weak agnostic will tell you, as an irrefutable statement of fact, that he or she personally does not know if there are any gods, I can tell you, as an irrefutable fact, that I personally don't believe in any gods.
Agnosticism is a sub-category of atheism. If you do not know whether there are any gods or not, then you do not believe in any gods. It is strong agnosticism and weak atheism that are close to being the same, not deism and atheism.
It must always be remembered that belief in evidenceless supernatural propositions is what requires Faith, and this belief is active. Atheism is passive. Anti-theism is politically active, but requires no Faith. Not all atheists are anti-theists or anti-religious by any means. Perhaps most atheists are just people who don't require a father figure or an imaginary guiding friend, and the various positions have more to do with emotion than reason.
So, in answer to the O.P., deism and atheism are clearly not the same things, but they are seldom in practical conflict, because the universe would be the same either way, so both groups are very likely to accept methodological naturalism as the way in which to discover our environment. That's the reason for the confusion. We only come into disagreement when talking metaphysics, not when talking physics, and that shows clearly on EvC science threads.
The non-theists and deists sound the same on science, with people like Percy and RAZD often accused of atheism by our creationist members. It makes sense, and is in accordance with the two "philosophies" that it should be that way. The deists are certainly not contradicting themselves, because methodological naturalism is not metaphysical naturalism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by RAZD, posted 02-09-2009 8:51 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1662 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 20 of 375 (498393)
02-10-2009 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Minnemooseus
02-09-2009 11:12 PM


Re: Theism, Deism, and Atheism/Agnosticism
Also, they say "historically". At the beginnings of the United States, wasn't deism a big thing? And atheism probably a small thing?
Yes, it was a major factor in framing the Declaration of Independence and the religious freedom in the constitution.
The essence of it all is, I'm calling deism to be essentially the same thing as agnosticism and/or atheism. To what degree that is true is the topic title question.
You can call it whatever you like, it is, after all, your opinion.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Minnemooseus, posted 02-09-2009 11:12 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22953
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 21 of 375 (498410)
02-10-2009 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Nighttrain
02-09-2009 9:22 PM


Re: Ath vs Dei
Nighttrain writes:
An atheist looks at religion and sees nothing but unfulfilled claims, dodgy texts, failure to uphold tenets, and a bloody history.
I've always assumed that atheists come to that position because they truly don't believe supernatural beings exist, but maybe some atheists come to that position out of a repugnance for organized religion? Just speculating, I'm not an atheist myself.
Deists believe in an unknowable god, but don`t know how they thought that.
Yeah, though I wouldn't describe it this way, that's probably me.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Nighttrain, posted 02-09-2009 9:22 PM Nighttrain has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3548 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 22 of 375 (498417)
02-10-2009 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by RAZD
02-09-2009 8:57 PM


RAZD writes:
So what does the atheist believe?
The atheist believes there is no evidence for the clock maker and denies the existence of the clock. The atheist perceives the clock to be simply a series of mechanisms that work together through natural laws to resemble order in the myst of chaos. Whether this series of mechanisms that has been named "The Clock" has a creator or not is unknown.
Why not be an agnostic then, one might ask? Well, it's less of a headache to be an atheist. Why? Imagine if you have to be neutral on every possible fairy tale creature that has ever been thought of by people in the past. You can go ahead being neutral about the immaterial pink unicorns, goblins, witches, and what else have you's if you want. For me, it's less of a headache to simply deny the existence of something because there is absolutely no evidence for its existence in the first place.
If the atheist believes that if any clockmaker exists that it must be a bad clockmaker, citing evidence of bad designs, doesn't that make them closer to the christian than to the deist?
No

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 02-09-2009 8:57 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 375 (498419)
02-10-2009 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Nighttrain
02-09-2009 9:22 PM


Which Concept Of God?
Nighttrain writes:
Deists believe in an unknowable god, but don`t know how they thought that.
That deists believe in a god indicates that they must have a sense that the supernatural exists.
I would assume that there is an element of agnosticism in deists who have no particular god which they believe in. By and large, do deists in the Western world identify the Biblical god as their god?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Nighttrain, posted 02-09-2009 9:22 PM Nighttrain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by bluescat48, posted 02-10-2009 9:10 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 34 by RAZD, posted 02-10-2009 7:47 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4446 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 24 of 375 (498424)
02-10-2009 9:10 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Buzsaw
02-10-2009 8:47 AM


Re: Which Concept Of God?
I would assume that there is an element of agnosticism in deists who have no particular god which they believe in. By and large, do deists in the Western world identify the Biblical god as their god?
I would feel that they probably identify their concept of god as similar to early man before man anthropomorphed god.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Buzsaw, posted 02-10-2009 8:47 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member (Idle past 132 days)
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 25 of 375 (498429)
02-10-2009 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by RAZD
02-09-2009 8:51 PM


The atheist believes there is no evidence of god/s and that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence (all A is B, B therefore A logical fallacy).
Atheists believe no such thing. We believe there is plentiful evidence that there is no god. In fact, my atheism has little to do with god or no god, I simply believe in a world without any supernatural elements.
That's the key difference between deism and atheism: deists are happy to accept the existence of the supernatural.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by RAZD, posted 02-09-2009 8:51 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Percy, posted 02-10-2009 10:11 AM Dr Jack has not replied
 Message 27 by bluegenes, posted 02-10-2009 10:21 AM Dr Jack has not replied
 Message 33 by RAZD, posted 02-10-2009 7:26 PM Dr Jack has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22953
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 26 of 375 (498431)
02-10-2009 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Dr Jack
02-10-2009 9:48 AM


Mr Jack writes:
That's the key difference between deism and atheism: deists are happy to accept the existence of the supernatural.
Speaking only for myself, I wouldn't say I'm happy about accepting the possibility of the supernatural. Conflicted is more like it, which is why I prefer to describe myself as believing in a higher purpose, becoming more ambiguous after that.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Dr Jack, posted 02-10-2009 9:48 AM Dr Jack has not replied

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2734 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 27 of 375 (498432)
02-10-2009 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Dr Jack
02-10-2009 9:48 AM


Mr Jack writes:
In fact, my atheism has little to do with god or no god, I simply believe in a world without any supernatural elements.
I think you're a metaphysical naturalist, which would include being an atheist, of course. But, although I'm sure most atheists are metaphysical naturalists, quite a lot aren't. I know that Wiki is not necessarily an authority, but this article's quite good on the evolution of the word atheist into its modern sense (or senses!).
Atheism - Wikipedia
That's the key difference between deism and atheism: deists are happy to accept the existence of the supernatural.
Therefore, no, it's not. The difference is that one lot believe in some kind of deity, and the other lot doesn't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Dr Jack, posted 02-10-2009 9:48 AM Dr Jack has not replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 323 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


(1)
Message 28 of 375 (498437)
02-10-2009 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by RAZD
02-09-2009 8:57 PM


So what does the atheist believe? If the atheist believes that if any clockmaker exists that it must be a bad clockmaker, citing evidence of bad designs, doesn't that make them closer to the christian than to the deist?
The atheist (or at least this one) sees neither evidence nor a logical requirement for any clockmaker at all. Good or bad.
The atheist (or at least this one) also sees the proposed need for a clockmaker to be in itself irrational as it inevitably leads to the question of who or what fulfills the role of the clockmaker maker.
The question of how that which we actually know exists came to exist (or even if this is a valid and meaningful question) is a difficult enough task.
Trying to work out the nature of existence of beings that we cannot even know actually exist is a just an unnecessary complication and a question too far.
In my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 02-09-2009 8:57 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 323 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


(1)
Message 29 of 375 (498440)
02-10-2009 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by RAZD
02-09-2009 8:51 PM


C'Mon Raz
The rational conclusion based on evidence is agnosticism, the uncertainty of existence of god/s.
Atheists are on one side of the line of agnosticism, deists are on the other. This may be a fine line, but the distinction is real, like the difference between negative numbers and positive numbers, with the zero position being your fine line.
The atheist believes there is no evidence of god/s and that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence (all A is B, B therefore A logical fallacy).
On this basis how many things should we be agnostic about?
I am "atheistic" about fairies living at the botttom of my garden.
This "atheism" towards fairies is based on the absence of evidence. Logically speaking should I be agnostic about fairies?
Would you say that you are agnostic about fairies?
Are you really agnostic about everything for which there is absolutely no evidence? Really?
The list of possibilities is literally infinite (or as finite as our imagination) with regard to the things for which there is no evidence.
Whilst you might claim agnosticism for fairies, leprechauns etc. on strictly logical grounds, in any practical assessment of likelihood and possibility, it is my guess that you are essentially atheistsic regarding a whole host of things for which the absence of evidence is the only evidence we have.
Or maybe I am wrong. Maybe the only rational conclusion regarding the existence of little green men that live in the toilet but who are magically undetectable to all human forms of detection is indeed to say "I don't know".
You tell me?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by RAZD, posted 02-09-2009 8:51 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Modulous, posted 02-10-2009 12:03 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 35 by RAZD, posted 02-10-2009 8:14 PM Straggler has replied

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 242 days)
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 30 of 375 (498445)
02-10-2009 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Straggler
02-10-2009 11:44 AM


'Fine line' is a relative term.
quote:
As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one can prove that there is not a God. On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think that I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because, when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.
--Betrand Russell
I know Moose wanted to avoid a battle of the metaphysics, but RAZD started it
How fine is the line betwixt deist and atheist? It depends on your own personal assessment on the importance of believing or not believing in a deity turns out to be. If it is crucial to believe, there is a chasm of difference between the two. If it is not, then the line is as fine as it can be. There's no normative conclusions that are derived from deism, it seems to me to be simply a difference purely in the realm of description.
On the other hand, there is a world of difference between
"I believe a god did x"
and
"I do not believe a god did x"
They are indeed, mutually exclusive positions. Does it matter whether god did x? It might do in some cases at some times, other times no. The line is thick or thin depending on context.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Straggler, posted 02-10-2009 11:44 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Straggler, posted 02-10-2009 12:45 PM Modulous has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024