TheSocialistAlliance

Dear Agnostics, I am a Deist strongly influenced by the philosophy of agnosticism and would like to address this post specifically on Deism.

Deism is a religious philosophy and movement that became prominent in England, France, and the United States in the 17th and 18th centuries and continues to this day. Deism differs from theism in that according to Deism God does not interfere with human life and the laws of the universe.

Deists typically reject supernatural events (prophecy, miracles) and divine revelation prominent in organized religion, along with holy books and revealed religions that assert the existence of such things. Instead, Deists hold that religious beliefs must be founded on human reason and observed features of the natural world, and that these sources reveal the existence of one God or supreme being.

In America, Enlightenment philosophy (which itself was heavily inspired by Deist ideals) played a major role in creating the principle of separation of church and state, expressed in the religious freedom clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution. Founding Fathers who were especially noted for being influenced by such philosophy include Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams,Cornelius Harnett, Gouverneur Morris, Hugh Williamson, James Wilson, and James Madison.

Although these men were members of traditional Christian denominations (Hugh Williamson was a Presbyterian and the rest were Episcopalians), their political speeches show distinct Deistic influence. Other notable Founding Fathers may have been more directly Deist. These include Ethan Allen and Thomas Paine (who published The Age of Reason, a treatise that helped to popularize Deism throughout America and Europe). Elihu Palmer (1764-1806) wrote the "Bible" of American Deism in his Principles of Nature (1801) and attempted to organize Deism by forming the "Deistical Society of New York."

Contemporary Deism attempts to integrate classical Deism with modern philosophy and the current state of scientific knowledge. This attempt has produced a wide variety of personal beliefs under the broad classification/category of belief of "Deism". The Modern Deism Web site includes one list of the unofficial tenets of modern deism.

Classical Deism held that a human's relationship with God was impersonal: God created the world and set it in motion but does not actively intervene in individual human affairs but rather through Divine Providence. Some modern Deists have modified this classical view and believe that humanity's relationship with God is transpersonal and that God intervenes in the world in ways that are subtle and beyond human understanding (Which would appear to conflict with the basic principle of stripping away the "mysteries" of religion).

Because Deism accepts God without accepting claims of divine revelation, it appeals to people from both ends of the religious spectrum. Antony Flew, for example, is a convert from atheism, and Raymond Fontaine was a Roman Catholic priest for over 20 years. William Veader is another well-known Deist.

Modern Deists hold a wide range of views on the nature of God and God's relationship to the world. The common area of agreement is the desire to use reason, experience, and nature as the basis of belief.

Finally, Deists hold a variety of opinions about prayer:

Some contemporary Deists believe (with the classical Deists) that God has created the universe perfectly, so no amount of supplication, request, or begging can change the fundamental nature of the universe; Whist other Deists believe that God is not an entity that can be contacted by human beings through petitions for relief; rather, God can only be experienced through the nature of the universe.

Happy Posting

El_Mariachi64

I'm an agnostic, just so you know where I'm coming from.

I have no problem with Deism. Its great. Particularly because its not like a church that you're born into...you just have to kind of figure it out on your own. Hence all the reason and stuff.

I have no problem with it 'cuz Just like agnostics or athiests, Deists realize that all the dogmas out there, Christianity or all the others are all based on nothing, myths and stories and violence. As such, you don't impose your views on anyone because you realize that since its all based on reason, people just have to realize it on their own.

Pretty much the only difference is that whereas you see things like the Big Bang and say "that must be God", I say, "well, I don't know, lack of evidence against it is not evidence for it, but it is possible (though highly unlikely) but who knows?"

But you know what? In the end, who cares?

We both realize that if God exists, he's not here. He doesn't care if we believe in him or not, because if he exists, we figure he's smart enough to realize that smart, free-thinking people have no reason to believe in him, and so he wouldn't hold it against us.

Its all about just living your life here on Earth as best you can, while trying to make the world a better place for those around you. If God exists, then we both realize it must be good enough for him. For me, even if he doesn't, then the possibility of living life to the fullest is reason enough to do so, because being alive is reason enough to live.

Vinterland

Deism is a fine philosophy, but I admit Deist's theistic assumptions have no merit. As El Mariachi said, the difference is the agnostic-deist may recognise that God may not exist, but will believe in it anyway and of course there are most deist's who wrongly believe fine-tuning arguments evidence design and the Divine. I think agnostic-atheism is much more humble because there are no intuitive leaps in logic made in coming to the conclusion.

__________________
And on we walked. Suddenly we heard a voice crying, "This is the sea. This is the deep sea. This is the vast and mighty sea." And when we reached the voice it was a man whose back was turned to the sea, and at his ear he held a shell, listening to its murmur.
And my soul said, "Let us pass on. He is the realist, who turns his back on the whole he cannot grasp, and busies himself with a fragment."
—Gibran Khalil Gibran, “The Greater Sea.”

QuantumTheory

Dear Sir, your discussion would greatly benefit if you could explain why deism has no merit and why this philosophy has no interest to agnosticism.

You feeling that it has no merit does not spell out the validity of the philosophy you are criticizing. Furthermore, deism deserves credibility and respect because this philosophy had such a profound influence on the enlightment during the 17th and 18th centuries in England, France and the United States.

Essentially, deism requires only that the human mind apply logic and reason to come to a recognition and understanding of God, because God is innately logical and reasonable. Consequently, deism also denies the importance of sacred ritual and church tradition and the possibility of miracles, all of which it deems beyond the scope of reason and empirical possibility.

Faith, according to deism, is the suspension or abandonment of reason and is therefore incompatible with a God who has created man to be a thinking, reasonable creature. Furthermore, while many deists acknowledge the wisdom and goodness of various traditional religious figures such as Jesus and the Buddha, deism denies the sacred or divine nature of these figures; for such persons to somehow share in God's divine nature would imply a favoritism or special dispensation on the part of God which deists deny as a possibility for a just and logical Creator.

Anthony Collins (1676–1729) and Matthew Tindal (1657–1733) were prominent English deists; in France the philosophy was taken up and expanded by Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) and Voltaire (1694–1778). By the late 1700s, deist philosophy came to include the belief that religious authority could only be derived by the application of reason to Scripture, not by an unquestioning reliance on the inerrancy of that Scripture; the denial of the doctrine of the Trinity; the belief that the teachings of Jesus, not the writings of St. Paul, were foundational; the idea that the importance of the resurrection was in its demonstration of the possibility of immortality, not as Christ's atonement for mankind's sins; the argument against the doctrines of Calvin (total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of the saints); a faith in the innate goodness and reasonableness of humans; and the belief that all religious thought should be free rather than coerced either by fear of threats or by the promise of rewards.

The influence of French and English deists on America's founders was immense. The vast majority of American leaders at the time of the Revolutionary War had read the works of Tindal, Rousseau, and Voltaire, and most of these founders considered themselves deists. John Quincy Adams, Ethan Allen, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson were among this group, as was Thomas Paine, who wrote extensively on the topic. Paine's Age of Reason (1794, 1796) has often been singled out as one of the most eloquent statements of advanced deist philosophy, although his blunt attacks on the orthodoxy caused him to be considered a heretic by many of his own day.

"How different is Christianity to the pure and simple profession of Deism. The true Deist has but one Deity, and his religion consists in contemplating the power, wisdom, and benignity of the Deity in his works, and in endeavoring to imitate him in everything moral, scientifical, and mechanical". Thomas Paine 1737-1809

"I have generally been denominated a Deist, the reality of which I never disputed, being conscious I am no Christian, except mere infant baptism make me one; and as to being a Deist, I know not, strictly speaking, whether I am one or not, for I have never read their writings; mine will therefore determine the matter; for I have not in the least disguised my sentiments, but have written freely without any conscious knowledge of prejudice for, or against any man, sectary or party whatever; but wish that good sense, truth and virtue may be promoted and flourish in the world, to the detection of delusion, superstition, and false religion; and therefore my errors in the succeeding treatise, which may be rationally pointed out, will be readily rescinded".
Ethan Allen, Reason: The Only Oracle Of Man (1784)

"My parents had early given me religious impressions, and brought me through my childhood piously in the Dissenting way. But I was scarce fifteen, when, after doubting by turns of several points, as I found them disputed in the different books I read, I began to doubt of Revelation itself. Some books against Deism fell into my hands; they were said to be the substance of sermons preached at Boyle's Lectures. It happened that they wrought an effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a thorough Deist".
Benjamin Franklin, The Autobiography (1817)

Gettin' In Tune

I am currently exploring atheism, but I have dabbled in deism quite a bit. I have a high respect for the deist philosophy. Deist always question everything, even deism itself. Unfortunately, deism sometimes get a bad wrap due to the "baggage of god" and this sometimes leads people to the bosom of agnosticism and atheism. Deism is far removed from theism and I view it as a continual process with evolving god models.

Many deist conceptions of god are filled with skepticism, so it therefore does not rely on faith and suspension of logic. It relies on a rational belief in god (I use the term god loosely) via nature and reason.

__________________
"But to find the truth we need imagination and skepticism both. We will not be afraid to speculate, but we will be careful to distinguish speculation from fact."--C.Sagan

Vinterland

Deistic reasoning is argument from personal incredulity, and not intellectual. You have misunderstood me, agnosticism can be applied to any belief - theistic or atheistic.

(Emphasis my own)

Please expand upon your statement I bolded.

__________________
And on we walked. Suddenly we heard a voice crying, "This is the sea. This is the deep sea. This is the vast and mighty sea." And when we reached the voice it was a man whose back was turned to the sea, and at his ear he held a shell, listening to its murmur.
And my soul said, "Let us pass on. He is the realist, who turns his back on the whole he cannot grasp, and busies himself with a fragment."
—Gibran Khalil Gibran, “The Greater Sea.”

Gettin' In Tune

Could you please elaborate on this thought.

__________________
"But to find the truth we need imagination and skepticism both. We will not be afraid to speculate, but we will be careful to distinguish speculation from fact."--C.Sagan

Skepticologist

Although I have a generally positive impression of deism, largely due to a high level of respect for some of its more famous proponents, e.g., Emerson, Thoreau, I can't say I've "dabbled in it".

One thing I'm curious about is what functional difference there is between a deist and an agnostic (I understand the definitional differences). All the descriptions of deism you've offered in your posts, reliance of logic and reason etc., would seem equally applicable to agnostics. The hangup is, as you put it, the "baggage of god".

If I understand it correctly, deists believe that god created the universe prefectly, then exited stage left, never to be seen again, dabble in human affairs, or even come to our aid in time of need.

So it seems to me that there's no functional difference between deists and agnostics.

I'm also not quite clear what the reason and logic is behind deists' belief in god as a creator. I've come across no attempts at an empirical proof, so I'm left to surmise that it likely boils to the idea of intelligent design, i.e., when you look at the beauty, complexity and order of the universe, it seems unreasonable to believe any non-divine force brought it into being.

Of course, to an agnostic, that's not an example of the application of logic and reason. It's more like needing something to explain the origin of the universe and making it up.

At any rate, I'd appreciate your response, as well as any others that may shed some light on my confusion.

__________________
"I am an agnostic; I do not pretend to know what many ignorant men are sure of."

Clarence Darrow

Vinterland

Theistic assumptions Deist's make:

1) God exists
2) God can be properly defined

These are statements of faith, not reason. Theistic knowledge, if it can be called such, does not require verification of any kind - all it takes it intuition and/or faith.

I came to the same conclusion through personal sample that Deist philosophy is applied to life very similarly to how atheism is. There isn't a vast difference between the two.

This is precisely the realm where Deist's fail. I can see why one would want to become a Deist. I imagine it would bring a feeling of completeness in "knowing" most of the big answers.

__________________
And on we walked. Suddenly we heard a voice crying, "This is the sea. This is the deep sea. This is the vast and mighty sea." And when we reached the voice it was a man whose back was turned to the sea, and at his ear he held a shell, listening to its murmur.
And my soul said, "Let us pass on. He is the realist, who turns his back on the whole he cannot grasp, and busies himself with a fragment."
—Gibran Khalil Gibran, “The Greater Sea.”

Gettin' In Tune

I do like like using the terms "strong" and "weak", but see no other way around it. The two deist assumptions that you stated could be applied to "strong" deists. Deistic beliefs vary among deist, and many deist that I know cannot claim for certain that:

1) God exists
2) God can be properly defined

Many deist have a degree of skepticism in god, and accept their skepticism instead of combating it with faith. Deists in a way are god theorists; they use nature, reason, and science to theorize various god models.

Again, it varies among the deist. Some view their deism as a philosophy and a continual process while others view it as a religion. Many deist consider themselves nontheist and align themselves closer to atheism than theism. If you eliminate the "baggage of god" deist have more in common with atheists than theists.

Deists do not make things up to explain the origins of the universe.

__________________
"But to find the truth we need imagination and skepticism both. We will not be afraid to speculate, but we will be careful to distinguish speculation from fact."--C.Sagan