Can deism have scientific background ?

General philosophy discussions. If you are not sure where to place your thread, please post it here. Share favorite quotes, discuss philosophers, and other topics.

Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on February 13th, 2018, 5:35 am 

Can deism have scientific background ?
=====
Deism is a theological theory concerning the relationship between
a Creator and the natural world.
To have relationship with the natural world the Creator or Creators
need to have concrete physical parameters.
#
Can deism have scientific background ?
Can God or Gods have physical and mathematical qualities ?
My answer is ''yes'' .
Why?
Because if we don't know what light is, if we don't know what electron is,
if we don't know what quantum particles are and what vacuum is -
then fundamental physics opening the door to deism.
===
a) '' All these fifty years of conscious brooding have brought me
no nearer to the answer to the question, 'What are light quanta?'
Nowadays every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows it,
but he is mistaken '‘ / Einstein /
b) 'It is important to realize that in physics today, we have
no knowledge of what energy is. We do not have a picture that
energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount. It is not that way.'' 
/  Richard Feynman about an electron /
c)  ” The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
  is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct
description of something more complex? “   / Paul Dirac ./
d) '' Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be
regarded as real.'' / Niels Bohr about quantum particles./
=======
Attachments
Deism = 0.jpg
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby doogles on February 14th, 2018, 6:24 am 

Socrat4 -a) '' All these fifty years of conscious brooding have brought me
no nearer to the answer to the question, 'What are light quanta?'
Nowadays every Tom, **** and Harry thinks he knows it,
but he is mistaken '‘ / Einstein /
b) 'It is important to realize that in physics today, we have
no knowledge of what energy is. We do not have a picture that
energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount. It is not that way.''
/ Richard Feynman about an electron /
c) ” The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct
description of something more complex? “ / Paul Dirac ./
d) '' Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be
regarded as real.'' / Niels Bohr about quantum particles./


We should frame these four statements as a 2018 milestone in the history of human progress and discovery -- the year we realised that the more we get into delving and discovering the nature of the universe, the more it shows how little we know about the basics.

Life is a gigantic joke of some kind.

And we humans appear to be the butt of it.

Bring on theology and philosophy.
User avatar
doogles
Active Member
 
Posts: 1006
Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Location: BRISBANE


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby doogles on February 14th, 2018, 6:30 am 

Post Script -- Oh and also bring on Omar Khayyam.
User avatar
doogles
Active Member
 
Posts: 1006
Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Location: BRISBANE


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on February 14th, 2018, 9:10 am 

[quote="doogles » February 14th, 2018, 6:24 am

We should frame these four statements as a 2018 milestone in the history
of human progress and discovery -- the year we realised that the more
we get into delving and discovering the nature of the universe,
the more it shows how little we know about the basics.

Life is a gigantic joke of some kind.

And we humans appear to be the butt of it.

Bring on theology and philosophy.[/quote]

===

The Seven Hermetic Principles
===
1. The Universe is something Intellectual.
2. As above, so below.
3. From potential to active existence.
4. Everything in the Universe can vibrate.
5. Everything in the Universe has its cause.
6. Everything in the Universe has its opposite.
7. The Universe has its own rhythm.
         / Hermes Trismegistus /
=========

Plato – world of ideas.
Leibniz - monadas.
Kant - thing-in-itself
=============.

“There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio,
than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
   William Shakespeare, Hamlet
==============
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 14th, 2018, 6:38 pm 

socrat44 » February 13th, 2018, 4:35 am wrote:Can deism have scientific background ?


What do you mean by "scientific background?"

Can you come up with a lot of reasons from the findings of science to support deism?

Sure. But we have people doing this for creationism.

Anybody can come up with a lot of reasons from the findings of science to support just about anything. As long as your methodology is rhetoric then you can come with up with a rationality to support most beliefs. It is only when you restrict your methodology to the methods of honest inquiry in science itself that this changes.

So if that is what you mean by "scientific background" then answer is NO! The methodology of science does not support creationism or deism of any kind.

Is there no middle ground?

Yes there is. You can at least require the beliefs to be consistent with the findings of science. That will rule out creationism. But will it select between the wide variety of beliefs in all the world religions? No, it will not.

So yes you can do this to justify theism, atheism, polytheism, animism, unicornism, fairyism, psychicism, ufoism, etc... as well as deism.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on February 15th, 2018, 6:09 am 

mitchellmckain » February 14th, 2018, 6:38 pm wrote:
Anybody can come up with a lot of reasons from the findings
of science to support just about anything.

=======

Yeah, but somehow science had progress in technology
leaving the philosophy of science for many speculations.
=========
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 16th, 2018, 3:54 am 

socrat44 » February 15th, 2018, 5:09 am wrote:Yeah, but somehow science had progress in technology
leaving the philosophy of science for many speculations.


But this technology did not come from the use of scientific findings in rhetoric to support subjective beliefs. Technology is more about seeing how the scientific discoveries can be exploited by applying the mathematical equations for the manipulation of things in the world.

It is not such a straightforward application of scientific principles which leads to deism. That requires highly subjective interpretations in applying the ideas of science to non-scientific issues.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on February 28th, 2018, 4:00 am 

The tendency to understand "God" by physical laws, formulas,
equations using the Quantum Theory ( Physics) never will be ended.
a)
Does Quantum Physics Make it Easier to Believe in God?
https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/cont ... elieve-god
b)
Does Quantum Physics Prove God's Existence?
http://physics.about.com/od/physicsmyth ... tumGod.htm
c)
Does quantum theory prove God exists?
http://www.asktheatheists.com/questions ... od-exists/
d)
Is quantum mechanics creationism, and not science?
      Werner A Hofer
https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.00227
https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.00227v1

(Submitted on 1 Feb 2018,  last revised 23 Feb 2018)
e)
. . . . . etc
================================
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 28th, 2018, 4:44 am 

socrat44 » February 28th, 2018, 3:00 am wrote:The tendency to understand "God" by physical laws, formulas,
equations using the Quantum Theory ( Physics) never will be ended.
a)
Does Quantum Physics Make it Easier to Believe in God?

Yes.

socrat44 » February 28th, 2018, 3:00 am wrote:b)
Does Quantum Physics Prove God's Existence?

No.

socrat44 » February 28th, 2018, 3:00 am wrote:d)
Is quantum mechanics creationism, and not science?

No.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 28th, 2018, 1:06 pm 

As for the links...

a) link broken, but I agree with this because QM does away with the viability of physical determinism. In other words, we it is no longer have this system of physical causality where there is no room for anything else.
b) All this shows is what I explained before, you can use the finding of science in rhetoric to support just about anything. And this link in fact refutes the argument that QM can prove the existence of God.
c) A link to "ask the atheists."
d) Link is to a paper "Is quantum mechanics creationism, and not science?"
But what does the question actually refer to? Not the creationism of the anti-evolutionists
The law of causality requires physical effects to be due to physical causes. For this reason any theoretical model which replaces physical causes by mathematical objects is creationism, that is, it creates physical objects out of mathematical elements.

But this is still nonsense. Quantum mechanics does not replace physical causes, it simply shows certain of them to be nonexistent within the premises of Bell's inequality (which are the premises of the scientific world view). The most we can conclude is that the system of causality in the scientific world view is not closed. This is indeed why QM makes it easier to believe in a spiritual (non-physical) aspect of reality but it is no proof that such a thing exists and it certainly lends no kind of support to the belief that the universe was created by an intelligent being of any kind.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on February 28th, 2018, 8:48 pm 

mitchellmckain » February 28th, 2018, 1:06 pm wrote: Quantum mechanics does not replace physical causes, it simply shows
certain of them to be nonexistent within the premises of Bell's inequality
(which are the premises of the scientific world view).
The most we can conclude is that the system of causality in the scientific
world view is not closed.
This is indeed why QM makes it easier to believe in a spiritual (non-physical)
aspect of reality but it is no proof that such a thing exists and it certainly
lends no kind of support to the belief that the universe was created
by an intelligent being of any kind.


Quantum mechanics does not replace physical ( CLASSICAL) causes, it simply shows
certain of them to be nonexistent within the premises of Bell's inequality
(which are the premises of the scientific world view).
The most we can conclude is that the system of causality in the scientific (QUANTUM)
world view is not closed.
=============
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 28th, 2018, 10:39 pm 

socrat44 » February 28th, 2018, 7:48 pm wrote: Quantum mechanics does not replace physical ( CLASSICAL) causes, it simply shows
certain of them to be nonexistent within the premises of Bell's inequality
(which are the premises of the scientific world view).
The most we can conclude is that the system of causality in the scientific (QUANTUM)
world view is not closed.
=============

Your modifications are not correct.

If you want to look at things in terms of classical versus quantum physics, then you can say QM replaces all classical causality except for gravity with quantum causes. But it also shows that there are events with no causes (no hidden variables) in the scientific view whatsoever. This latter is what I focused on because this is the game changer -- this is what makes it easier to believe in a non-physical aspect of reality and God.

But all it does is show that the system of physical causality (whether quantum or classical) is not a closed system. It does not show that there is any other causality. It is quite possible to believe that the physical is all there is and that some events are simply random with no determining cause whatsoever.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on March 1st, 2018, 7:38 am 

@mitchellmckain
Modern interpretation of Quantum physics cannot replace classical - deterministic  causality 
===========

These two systems  aren't closed.
There are interactions between these  two systems where:
a) macro  classical - deterministic  causality   is possible to observe and
b) micro quantum causality that is hidden -  unobservant
( Heisenberg uncertainty principle )  and  seems ''random''.
Planck, Einstein were skeptical towards the only (!) statistical interpretation
of quantum mechanics.
  Niels Bohr said:
'' Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real.''
Richard Feynman said:
“If you thought that science was certain - well, that is just an error on your part.”
. . . . .

And the last scientific opinion:
Why Do Interpretations Of Quantum Physics Matter?
FEB 27, 2018 @ 04:10 PM

A couple of weeks ago, fellow Forbes blogger Ethan Siegel took to his keyboard
with the goal of making me sigh heavily, writing a post about interpretations
of quantum physics calling the idea that you need an interpretation
"the biggest myth in quantum physics."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/ ... ab2c357d57

So, ''Shut up and calculate''
Richard Feynman / David Mermin

=========
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on March 8th, 2018, 10:38 pm 

Question.
Why are we so continuously relinquishing to consider that both the
existence and the nonexistence of God are definitely non-provable?

Answer.
Because our brain works on two levels:
a) conscious - god doesn't exist
b) subconscious - god does exist
========== 
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby BadgerJelly on March 9th, 2018, 1:45 am 

Socrat -

If you can define something then you have some residual "proof" of something. I think that is more an issue of expressing thought through words than anything else. That is not to devalue words onoy to point out there meaningful limitations.

Experience is generally what solidifies our take on something. I may never believe that kangaroo's existed until I saw one. The old "seeing is believing" has now been taken over by predictions, possibilities and probabilities.

For me the idea of an omnipotent being makes no logical sense. I cannot comprehend such a thing no more than I can comprehend an upside down sound that has been painted yellow backwards. Stringing words together like such reveals there limitation of expression and the problem of articulating a problem that can cause further branches of incoherent nonsense.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5383
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on March 9th, 2018, 2:27 am 

BadgerJelly » March 9th, 2018, 1:45 am wrote:Socrat -
If you can define something then you have some residual "proof" of something.


The conscious mind is just as  the "tip of the iceberg "  . . .
. . .  . the visible 10 percent  your Conscious Mind,
and the hidden 90 percent your Subconscious Mind.
Attachments
iceberg.jpg
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby mitchellmckain on March 9th, 2018, 2:31 am 

socrat44 » March 8th, 2018, 9:38 pm wrote:Question.
Why are we so continuously relinquishing to consider that both the
existence and the nonexistence of God are definitely non-provable?

Answer.
Because our brain works on two levels:
a) conscious - god doesn't exist
b) subconscious - god does exist
========== 


Like any dark corner people can project whatever they want onto the subconscious in a completely self serving manner. I will not indulge such dishonesty.

Whatever may go on in the subconscious mind, it is the decisions of the conscious mind which represent our positions on the matter whether theist like myself or non-theist like BJ.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on March 10th, 2018, 3:59 am 

mitchellmckain » March 9th, 2018, 2:31 am wrote:
socrat44 » March 8th, 2018, 9:38 pm wrote:Question.
Why are we so continuously relinquishing to consider that both the
existence and the nonexistence of God are definitely non-provable?

Answer.
Because our brain works on two levels:
a) conscious - god doesn't exist
b) subconscious - god does exist
========== 


Whatever may go on in the subconscious mind,
it is the decisions of the conscious mind which represent
our positions on the matter whether theist like myself or non-theist like BJ.


a) The conscious mind is just as  the " tip of the iceberg " 
. . .  . the visible 10 percent  your Conscious Mind,
and the hidden 90 percent your Subconscious Mind.

b) The Universe as whole is: matter and dark matter/energy.
visible 5% matter of Universe is just as  the " tip of the iceberg " 
and the unseen  95% of dark matter/energy is  hidden ''under water''.

Conclusion.
Hidden dark matter/energy dominates  in the Universe but we don't know
how 95% dark matter/energy can create 7% visible matter.

Hidden 90%  subconscious Mind must dominate  in the Brain 
but  we don't see this situation.

We don't know interaction between visual matter and hidden dart matter/energy.
We don't know interaction between subconsciousness and consciousness.

=====
Attachments
dark matter-energy.jpg
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby mitchellmckain on March 14th, 2018, 4:13 pm 

socrat44 » March 10th, 2018, 2:59 am wrote:
mitchellmckain » March 9th, 2018, 2:31 am wrote:Whatever may go on in the subconscious mind,
it is the decisions of the conscious mind which represent
our positions on the matter whether theist like myself or non-theist like BJ.


a) The conscious mind is just as  the " tip of the iceberg " 
. . .  . the visible 10 percent  your Conscious Mind,
and the hidden 90 percent your Subconscious Mind.

This is true. But the reason for this is because the conscious mind is focused on the deliberative choices we make while the unconscious mind carries out the pre-programmed work of previous choices. For example, when we learn to walk or drive, it takes our conscious mind to learn how, after which we leave this to the unconscious mind to remember how it is done. Indeed the unconscious mind plays a big part in our memory functions all around, bringing forth things to our conscious mind when needed (hopefully).

socrat44 » March 10th, 2018, 2:59 am wrote:b) The Universe as whole is: matter and dark matter/energy.
visible 5% matter of Universe is just as  the " tip of the iceberg " 
and the unseen  95% of dark matter/energy is  hidden ''under water''.

Conclusion.
Hidden dark matter/energy dominates  in the Universe but we don't know
how 95% dark matter/energy can create 7% visible matter.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the mind. I have no doubt that you can see all kinds of rabbits and flowers in the random patterns of the clouds, but such things have very little significance for the living of our lives. Don't get me wrong, I am usually one of the first to point out that imagination and pattern recognition is a powerful tool even in science. But it can also go too far, as with schizophrenia. This is not to say that the conclusions you are drawing from what you see in scientific facts are wrong, only that they are quite subjective and thus are not a reasonable basis for expecting other people to agree with you.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on March 19th, 2018, 2:24 am 

mitchellmckain » March 14th, 2018, 4:13 pm wrote:
socrat44 » March 10th, 2018, 2:59 am wrote:
mitchellmckain » March 9th, 2018, 2:31 am wrote:Whatever may go on in the subconscious mind,
it is the decisions of the conscious mind which represent
our positions on the matter whether theist like myself or non-theist like BJ.


a) The conscious mind is just as  the " tip of the iceberg " 
. . .  . the visible 10 percent  your Conscious Mind,
and the hidden 90 percent your Subconscious Mind.

This is true. But the reason for this is because the conscious mind is focused on the deliberative choices we make while the unconscious mind carries out the pre-programmed work of previous choices. For example, when we learn to walk or drive, it takes our conscious mind to learn how, after which we leave this to the unconscious mind to remember how it is done. Indeed the unconscious mind plays a big part in our memory functions all around, bringing forth things to our conscious mind when needed (hopefully).

socrat44 » March 10th, 2018, 2:59 am wrote:b) The Universe as whole is: matter and dark matter/energy.
visible 5% matter of Universe is just as  the " tip of the iceberg " 
and the unseen  95% of dark matter/energy is  hidden ''under water''.

Conclusion.
Hidden dark matter/energy dominates  in the Universe but we don't know
how 95% dark matter/energy can create 7% visible matter.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the mind.
I have no doubt that you can see all kinds of rabbits and flowers
in the random patterns of the clouds, but such things have very little
significance for the living of our lives.
Don't get me wrong, I am usually one of the first to point out that imagination
and pattern recognition is a powerful tool even in science. But it can also go too far,
as with schizophrenia. This is not to say that the conclusions you are drawing
from what you see in scientific facts are wrong, only that they are quite subjective
and thus are not a reasonable basis for expecting other people to agree with you.


I only say:
We don't know interaction between visual matter and hidden dart matter/energy.
We don't know interaction between subconsciousness and consciousness.
But we have so-called ''philosophy of science''.
==========
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby BadgerJelly on March 19th, 2018, 4:07 am 

Socrat -

What you've posted above is a "proposal" not a "conclusion."

You are drawing psychological conclusions and then taking the analogy as a physical manifestation of a literal Ice Berg.

I am not saying it is a silly thing to think, or worth considering. I think you'd make much more progress with these ideas if you looked more closely at how you're jumping from one idea to the next. Explore the other options that could counter this position and look for the most wacky one you can think up too.

My thoughts are to make sure anything I think can be countered by some other idea (at least in part), and if they cannot be countered in any way then I must be at fault due to lack of a broader perspective on the issue.

Anyway, thanks for posting. Nice to see someone open with their ideas and unafraid to express incomplete thoughts.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5383
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on March 19th, 2018, 4:48 am 

BadgerJelly » March 19th, 2018, 4:07 am wrote:Socrat -

What you've posted above is a "proposal" not a "conclusion."

You are drawing psychological conclusions and then taking the analogy
as a physical manifestation of a literal Ice Berg.

I am not saying it is a silly thing to think, or worth considering.
I think you'd make much more progress with these ideas if you looked
more closely at how you're jumping from one idea to the next.
Explore the other options that could counter this position and look
for the most wacky one you can think up too.

My thoughts are to make sure anything I think can be countered
by some other idea (at least in part), and if they cannot be countered
in any way then I must be at fault due to lack of a broader perspective on the issue.

Anyway, thanks for posting.
Nice to see someone open with their ideas and unafraid to express incomplete thoughts.


Thanks,
however i wrote nothing about '' the psychological conclusions ''
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby BadgerJelly on March 19th, 2018, 5:37 am 

You were using a analogy of a psychological analogy to ground your proposition in though.

There is no obvious correlation between human subconscious and dark matter. It is unclear what you mean by making such analogies.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5383
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on March 19th, 2018, 7:15 am 

BadgerJelly » March 19th, 2018, 5:37 am wrote:You were using a analogy of a psychological analogy to ground your proposition in though.

There is no obvious correlation between human subconscious and dark matter.
It is unclear what you mean by making such analogies.


i don't bring analogy of ''correlation between human subconscious and dark matter''
i say that we know as much about dark matter as about subconsciousness.
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby mitchellmckain on March 20th, 2018, 2:12 am 

socrat44 » March 19th, 2018, 6:15 am wrote:
i don't bring analogy of ''correlation between human subconscious and dark matter''
i say that we know as much about dark matter as about subconsciousness.



But that is incorrect. Dark matter is really just a place holder for whatever is causing extra gravitational effect which which visible sources do not account for. We don't know what it is or even if it is matter at all. We know a good deal more about the subconscious. But in neither case is it objectively appropriate to use them as a gap into which you can stuff whatever subjective beliefs you want.

Wikipedia: Psychologists and psychiatrists use the term "unconscious" in traditional practices, where metaphysical and New Age literature, often use the term subconscious. It should not, however, be inferred that the concept of the unconscious and the New Age concept of the subconscious are precisely equivalent, even though they both warrant consideration of mental processes of the brain. Psychologists and psychiatrists take a much more limited view of the capabilities of the unconscious than are represented by New Age depiction of the subconscious.


As scientists, the psychologists and psychiatrists stick to what we know from objective evidence of what the unconscious mind is capable of rather than using this as an excuse to justify a lot of subjective beliefs. The point is not that the new age believers are wrong, but only that this cannot be established objectively either way (except perhaps in cases where the the new age believers go too far). So as long as you don't go too far then you are free to believe what you choose, but without objective evidence it is not reasonable to expect others to accept such claims. In this, it is like all the religions, including my own.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby BadgerJelly on March 23rd, 2018, 10:35 am 

Socrat -

Okay, my mistake.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5383
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on March 24th, 2018, 8:34 pm 

BadgerJelly » March 23rd, 2018, 10:35 am wrote:Socrat -

Okay, my mistake.


Not many can ask yourself:
When was the last time you were honest with yourself ?
Thank you @BadgerJelly
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby BadgerJelly on March 25th, 2018, 12:38 am 

The issue is I have no idea what you meant or what you are saying in the OP other than what seems like a proposition of "We don't know, therefore god."

I don't imagine your position is that simple. I am not sure what you're saying or expecting.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5383
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby socrat44 on March 25th, 2018, 5:57 am 

socrat44 » March 19th, 2018, 7:15 am wrote:
BadgerJelly » March 19th, 2018, 5:37 am wrote:You were using a analogy of a psychological analogy to ground your proposition in though.

There is no obvious correlation between human subconscious and dark matter.
It is unclear what you mean by making such analogies.


i don't bring analogy of ''correlation between human subconscious and dark matter''
i say that we know as much about dark matter as about subconsciousness.


BadgerJelly » March 23rd, 2018, 10:35 am wrote:Socrat -

Okay, my mistake.


BadgerJelly » March 25th, 2018, 12:38 am wrote:The issue is I have no idea what you meant
or what you are saying in the OP other than what seems like a proposition of
"We don't know, therefore god."

I don't imagine your position is that simple.
I am not sure what you're saying or expecting.


''Okay, my mistake.'' because
''i don't bring analogy of ''correlation between human subconscious and dark matter''
as you say, but
''i say that we know as much about dark matter as about subconsciousness.''
This was ''issue'' that i wrote '' Thank you @BadgerJelly''
====
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Can deism have scientific background ?

Postby Event Horizon on March 25th, 2018, 4:49 pm 

Only if a deity has a scientific basis in fact. Until then it remains a late iron-age myth. Considering all the deities supposedly active on Earth, there ought to be something to evidence it.
Belief alone is not evidence of anything but belief alone. Can't help that.
User avatar
Event Horizon
Member
 
Posts: 364
Joined: 05 Mar 2018
Location: England somewhere.



Return to Anything Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests