pseudonous

I think jaej is right. Someone who has a belief in god as I defined it would be an agnostic. You were missing my point a bit on having a belief that I will eat a hamburger today. What I meant to imply is that you could have a belief in a god that didn't impact your life in any significant way such that you would think or behave differently than someone who does not believe in a god. I find this line of thinking interesting, because is shows my previous statement that the difference between an agnostic and a deist is that one believes in god and the other does not believe in god is too simplistic. Given that everyone has there own unique point of view, I bet there is someone out there that sees it that way.

Your right, of course, there seems to be a different motive and/or method for a deist than an agnostic. The most minimal form of deism must include more than god causing the universe and then laying back.

As far as what makes something intuitively obvious, I don't know but I'll hazard a guess that anything that adds strength to your world view without raising to many more questions would fall into the intuitively obvious category. It is completely subjective.

I think you might of hit the nail on the head with this one. Since or knowledge of the world is finite but increasing, we all like to think about it's limitations or border. The difference between a deist and agnostic is that a deist prefers to approach the problem by stepping out of the bound and work his way back in, while an agnostic prefers to work from within the system to expand the boarder outward. I can't really think of a clear way to express this so I am reduced to using an analogy. I think I would need to visit a deist forum myself, if I wanted to develop a more clear understanding of their perceptions.