Theism, Deism and Atheism
To my mind, the choice is essentially between the
above. I am a theist; but I am strongly opposed to some other theists – namely
Muslims. I'm a theist; and I am opposed to some deists whom I admire – for example, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. As a theist I have to oppose
atheists. I like some atheists but some atheists are so antithetical to
everything I support in all religious contexts (and incidentally in most
others) that they have got to be my opponents.
Perhaps some definitions are in order. A theist
believes that the universe is God’s creation and that he sustains it from hour
to hour. Muslims believe this and this is what I believe.
A deist believes that God created the universe but
that he lost interest thereafter – at least, he ceased to be involved in it.
An atheist believes that the very concept of God is
nonsensical. To me, this belief has no justification – which, of course, does
not mean that it isn’t true.
We just don’t have a proof to support theism, deism
or atheism. Proofs belong to
Mathematics. We do have, as David Berlinski says, arguments.
By default, the human race has been theistic.
Perhaps this is genetically pre-determined. On the Darwin view our
pre-determined theism has nothing whatever to do with Truth. Random Mutation and
Natural Selection are not, even remotely, interested in Truth, only in survival
and reproduction. But one of our default suppositions is that some things are
true, whether or not they suit us. It’s very difficult to have a conversation,
let alone an argument, with someone who denies that some things are true and
some things are false.
Logical Positivism reigned for years in British
academia, declaring that only propositions which had ‘scientific’ support could
be regarded as meaningful. It fell apart when this declaration turned out not
to be scientifically supportable.
Most of us have lots of default suppositions. We
believe that there is a real world outside our minds. To deny this violates all
our instincts. Some, I think, do take this position – not me and not, I think,
most human beings. By default, we believe that there are minds other than our
own. Solipsism says there aren’t. Have you ever met a solipsist? Is it his mind
which is unique (and uniquely creative); or did he persuade you that yours is
the unique mind? It can’t be both. I think I toyed with solipsism when I was
about eleven. I gave it up before I was twelve.
Another supposition we nearly all share is our
belief in the past. A philosopher could assert that our belief in the past is
merely a construction of our minds. Hardly any of us believes this for a
moment.
Our default suppositions won’t go away. One of our default
suppositions is that the universe we live in (a life permitting universe) is
not an accident. We can’t prove that it isn't. For me, even wanting to do so is
perverse. It’s like wanting to prove that free will is an illusion. Even if you
managed to prove that it is, you would still have to behave as if it isn't.
It’s impossible to believe that there is no such thing as blame or responsibility.
Try it when I poke you in the eye.
Am I declaring that our default suppositions are
true by default? Not quite. But life is pretty difficult when you deny them.
The argument (not the proof) is that the universe
has a cause. So we are theists by default. Deism is an unnecessary epicycle.
Atheism doesn’t get a look in. Only Theism comports with our default
suppositions.
I know that this is incomplete. Please do me the
favour of pointing out any logical gaps that you spot.
No comments:
Post a Comment