It is. So is common sense.
2 Likes
Common sense is also incompatible with deism.
1 Like
Dawkins says, I believe, that Deism is watered down theism.
2 Likes
It could be so described.
The Epicureans (whom I much admire) were atheists. Much criticized as such, they sought to shrug off the nuisance of the nag by declaring that yes, there were gods, but they lived very far from mankind and took no interest in human affairs. Ancient deism of a kind.
Latter day deists allow that God created the world but then withdrew from it, to take no notice of it ever again.
Since Darwin, there cannot be many deists.
2 Likes
Since Darwin… That’s right. Deism seems to have had its heyday between the Enlightenment and The Origin of Species. Since then, it’s been one fallback position for people who eschew atheism or agnosticism. Another similar fallback is pantheism. Astronaut Neil Armstrong claimed Deism as his belief about God, so I take it he didn’t consider himself a Christian.
2 Likes
Of course one can accept believers as political allies without making any allowance for the absurdity of their beliefs.
2 Likes
Perfectly stated. I also immensely admire Epicurus. His ancient “paradox” was the model for Hume’s denial of god.
*“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”*
2 Likes
Great quote! I think the Founder’s education in the writings of the Greek philosophers such as Epicurus correlates directly to the greater diversity of religious thought in that era, with many preferring Deism to traditional Christianity.
1 Like
I believe Jefferson described himself as an Epicurean…
2 Likes
Well…deism is certainly not based on that savior, son of god, scapegoat of Jesus or any creator deity that plans, knows, or cares about humans.
2 Likes
Yet, we can acknowledge that common sense only pertains to what we know. What we do not know (as a species in this space and time) is common sense of another species in another space and time.
I am willing to accept this about my knowledge; that there is much more that I do not know about the whole of the multi-verse in the whole of time and space than I know about my part in it.
I can find a path that allows me to accept a creator of energy/matter that exists, but not in the universe I am in or not only here.
It is even less a deity than the creator spoken of in Deism. It may even be an accidental creator, and that is more in line with my thinking about all that exists.
1 Like
Yes, he did. Thanks, Cogito, for the reminder.
1 Like
A supernatural creator? Of energy/matter? But in another universe?
Please explain a little more.
1 Like
Put on your imagination cap and read it again. There is little to explain. But, I did not say it was a “supernatural” creator. If it exists, it is not any deity like humans imagine and worship and build religions and holy script around.
If it is an “accidental creator” it may not know that it created, and certainly what it created might be not worthy of its notice.
This is the sort of creation my “common sense” could reasonably accept as possible or even probable…but it wouldn’t make any difference to my life or any life on this planet or in this universe or to the creator entity’s existence.
1 Like
Thank you, Jeanne, for replying. I appreciate it, though I don’t get what you’re saying.
Except that your creator is not supernatural.
My imagination cap didn’t help though I retrieved it from storage and tied it on firmly.
I also don’t understand what you once said about not believing in free will yet holding individuals responsible for what they do.
But then I don’t understand Schopenhauer either. Or Heidegger. So the trouble might be my insufficient powers of comprehension rather than yours of explanation.
2 Likes
This is not my personal creator…but is the best I can do to accept a creators existence. It doesn’t care about me and I don’t care about it. It just doesn’t matter to anything, except it may have created our universe deliberately or accidentally. It is not a deity, but exists…perhaps…in another universe as an entity that affected space/time and created the speck of energy/matter.
All total speculation on my part, which I formed when a Christian forum asked if there was any sort of creator deity that I could accept. Et voila!
I do accept the existence of multiple universes with branes, which may blend at times. That concept explains some odd happenings, in my opinion.
Several decades ago, I had an online conversation with a Christian who challenged me that if I accepted Free Will then I must also accept God. By the end of our conversation, I had thought myself into a person, who does not accept Free Will. Free Will is our illusion that helps make sense of our lives and keeps us sane. Acting as though we have Free Will, we make choices to behave in harmony with civilization or to behave in disharmony with civilization. Making those Free Will “choices” we accept the rewards or punishments of our choices based on civilizations rules. So…yes, individuals can be held responsible for choosing to obey or disobey civilizations rules, although we may also make choices about how to reward or punish based upon their life history.
Punishment is initially more about keeping the rest of society safe within the rules, than it is to mold an individual’s behavior to those rules. When both goals are met, then that is all to the good. If we had no societies with rules, then all bets are off as to whether or not that society survives to produce members that can thrive with some harmony, at least.
Free Will doesn’t exist, because from the beginning of our space/time, everything affects everything. But, what do I know. I tend to lose track of my thoughts when Quantum Mechanics gets involved with determinism and Free Will.
Here is an article “explaining” about branes. There is nothing here about a creator entity, but how would we know, and of course, we would still have the problem of First Cause. But…if there were something way more powerful and way beyond our ability to be aware of it, that caused something, which caused something to begin, which became our universe…
It is possible that it is possible, and that is as close as I can get to accepting a creator.
1 Like
I appreciate the time and trouble you have taken to explain your credo, Jeanne.
I regret to say that I fail to follow your explanation. Perhaps other readers will be more receptive to your ideas. I hope that if they are they will say so.
The article you link us to may make sense to physicists, but for me it might as well be in a foreign language of which I know not a single word.
2 Likes
I always thought the idea of “multiverses” was far fetched. Because how can our universe end, and another one begin? Infinite space is infinite. End of story! Haha! But what do I know, I’m about as far from a rocket scientist as you can get!!
Same with free will. It seems like a simple answer to me - if you are able to make choices - which you are - you have free will. End of story again.
But who am I to question Sam Harris, or whoever…
2 Likes
Sam Harris needs to be questioned, Liz, and argued out of court. The more you do it, the better.
1 Like
This is most certainly NOT a credo. It is just a speculation. 
Too many Sci-Fi books and movies, no doubt. But, if my imagination allows me to think way outside the box and to contemplate the how and why of my existence and insignificance, why not speculate. It doesn’t cost me anything but my time nor condemns me to a credo that defines my life.
Sam Harris has a brain that allows him to speculate on Free Will? Well…this IS news. I thought he pickled that years ago.
2 Likes