Deism, derived from the Latin word deus meaning “god”) combines the rejection of revelation and authority as a source of religious knowledge with the conclusion that reason and observation of the natural world are sufficient to determine the existence of a single creator of the universe.
Today, deism is considered to exist in two principal forms: classical and modern where the classical view takes what is called a “cold” approach by asserting the non-intervention of deity in the natural behavior of the created universe while the modern deist formulation can be either “warm” (citing an involved deity) or cold, non-interventionist creator. These lead to many subdivisions of modern deism which tends, therefore, to serve as an overall category of belief.
Being a belief, we first need to clarify that which kind of belief it is, it must be either reasonable or unreasonable. To do that, we need to look at the arguments that are commonly presented as being a reason for being a deist.
Deists do provide some philosophical and scientific arguments in the support of their beliefs. Such as, many deists use the Kalam Cosmological Argument as Thomas Hobbes did. My refutation of that argument is here. The Kalam Argument is formally valid, but not a thing to be worried of as I demonstrated in the earlier article of mine.
Though the cosmological argument is so far the most used argument among deists, some deists tend to use the argument from morality, which is refuted here.
Widely among deists, spiritual experiences give a subjective reason to them to believe that some ultimate spiritual being is responsible for that. Here, I want to add that scientifically, spiritual experiences are just neurological illusions that are caused by some irregular activities through the neurons. This can be easily justified by pointing to the God helmet mostly developed by Michael Persinger.
The helmet itself succeeds to give a spiritual experience which feels like a presence of a supernatural being aside. Although the interesting part is that it just simulates some parts of our brain to do that. So, imagine, if by some natural occurrences, a particular irregularities of some particular neural pathways lead to a particular spiritual experience, then that implies that it is likely that all the spiritual experiences are just some neural activities! Although I know this is just an assumption, but it is likely to be true because it is scientifically valid.
Even true spiritual experiences don’t confirm the existence of a deity, because it ultimately becomes an assumption which is unlikely to be true, thus not a thing to be worried about in the present.
Therefore, the deistic belief ultimately reveals itself as an irrational belief.
But an irrational belief doesn’t imply that this belief is harmful to humanity. Because deism encourages people to study sciences and to be curious way more than any religion ever did. These are the following good and bad aspects of deism in my point of view:
* It encourages and originates curiosity.
* It discourages close-mindedness in most of the issues.
* It is a belief that can support the well being of a people, unlike organized religions.
* Above all, it is an irrational belief, it is the biggest negative point to it.
* It can lead to confirmation bias in a particular issue.
What are your views on deism? After all, my goal was not to convince you, my goal was to explain the matters that strike to me. If you have anything to add, feel free to add them in the comment box.
Thanks for reading, have a nice day, and if the day has finished, good night.
Follow us on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Refuting-God/106401523032141