ArisKatsaris comments on A sense of logic - Less Wrong

13 Post author: NancyLebovitz 10 December 2010 06:19PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (269)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 16 December 2010 03:10:43PM 1 point [-]

Any definition of God that's remotely connected to what people throughout history have meant by the concept must include (I believe) some characteristics that we would recognize as personhood, intelligence, purpose. Also atleast one of the following : superior power, superior wisdom, superior level of existence (to be superior to humans in atleast some way*).

"first cause" however is far, far, from being a universal characteristic of imagined Gods -- many ancient pantheons had their various Gods (even their supreme Gods) being born, growing up, occasionally overthrowing previous gods, etc.

So a minimalist concept of God wouldn't be limited to "first cause", and I don't think it should even include it as one of its elements.

If you want to describe a non-necessarily intelligent, non-necessarily purposeful "first cause", I would very strongly advise you not to use the word "God".

Comment author: byrnema 16 December 2010 05:07:20PM *  0 points [-]

OK ... there's been sufficient unanimity in responses, I will update my understanding of the question 'is the concept of God a privileged hypothesis?' to mean a God that is again personal and mindful. A God that is like a human being (but superior) is clearly a privileged hypothesis, reflecting the limitations of human psychology and imagination, and I have no reason to challenge that.

There really appears to be nothing to argue about regarding atheism/theism. I'll keep on the lookout though.