Deism is misunderstood as a non-theist alternative to traditional religions. It is based on belief in a transcendent power, similar in some ways to the imagined invisible gods of ancient theologies. But, being based on scientific facts1 and philosophical reasoning, rather than mythical fantasies, it is agnostic about the specific nature and desires of the presumed creator of the universe. So, there can be no official creed or rite that believers are bound to follow. This lack of an exclusive faith- & tradition-centered culture makes it seem equivalent to Atheism. And yet, it serves as the basis for a transcendent worldview, similar in some ways to a religion. Therefore, my holistic BothAnd philosophy falls under the umbrella category of philosophical Deism, which is puzzling to most Atheists and Theists, who tend to think in dualistic terms of Either/Or.
As a means to clarify the apparent paradox, I like to compare Deism to Theism & Polytheism by analogy with Buddhism & Christianity as offshoots of Hinduism & Judaism. Both ancient religions were focused on rituals & sacrifices designed to placate the gods in order to qualify for blessings, or to avoid divine wrath. But their rebellious offspring focused more on inner character and self-knowledge, while rejecting the fears & superstitions of the predecessors. The following quote from the Quora forum deftly illustrates the distinction between a formal priestly religion and an informal personal philosophy :
Buddhism and Hinduism in South East Asia are inseparable. Buddhism as taught by the Buddha is pure philosophy which the average lay Buddhist, like the lay Hindu, does not comprehend or care about. Buddhism is monasticism and has very little to offer to the laity other than an obligation to offer the monks alms to gain merit. What they, the common folk want is blessing, succor, protection from evil spirits, good harvests, health, marriage, children etc. None of this is addressed by pure Buddhism. So they go to Hindu temples and make offerings and recite prayers and to intercede for divine favour. They care not who the deity in the temple is whether it is Buddha or Brahma or Vishnu or Mariamman. In Thailand when you ask any lay person who the four faced Brahma is they will say “He is Erawan - four-faced Buddha!” (The most popular deity in Thailand!)2
Buddhism, as preached by Siddharta, was a route to personal enlightenment and salvation. It had no group rituals, sacrifices, catechisms or sacraments. Its core practice was best done in solitude. But the common people were not interested in such austere introspection. They wanted the same things that humans have always sought from religion : protection and providence3. So, like the Hebrews, some Buddhists continued Hindu traditions, including worshipping & praying to the old gods. Thus over time, the original monastic lifestyle of Buddhists became the exception rather than the rule. Similarly, imperial Christianity wandered away from the austerity and communism4 of the first disciples, while the people prayed to nature-gods and ancestors in the guise of Saints. Protestant Christians objected to this falling-away from first principles, and attempted to emulate the modest practices of the early church. But that turned-out to be easier said than done, as the masses were loathe to give-up some of their earthly blessings and nature worship (Christmas; Easter).
Post 82 continued . . . click Next
Sagan’s Hope
Sagan noted that “we are in need of other sorts of myth, myths of encouragement. Many religions, from Hinduism to Gnostic Christianity to Mormon doctrine, teach that — as impious as it may sound — it is the goal of humans to become gods.”
“Or consider a story in the Jewish Talmud left out of the Book of Genesis. (It is in doubtful accord with the account of the apple, the Tree of Knowledge, the Fall, and the expulsion from Eden.) In the Garden, God tells Eve and Adam that He has intentionally left the Universe unfinished. It is the responsibility of humans, over countless generations, to participate with God in a ‘glorious’ experiment — ‘completing the Creation.’”
This shows that Sagan was perfectly aware of the interpretation of religion that I am proposing: The promises of religion are true, because we’ll make them true.
I doubt that Sagan had a Transhumanist “glorious experiment” in mind when he called for a reconciliation with religion. But my own worldview could be interpreted as describing the Big Bang & Evolution as a sort of experiment in world-making. Apparently, the Programmer left the the progressive program open-ended, to allow Freewill and Chance to partly determine the ultimate outcome of the evolutionary process. The Turing Church is a technological futurist society that expects computing power to eventually become god-power. It’s similar to my own view, except that my Programmer is eternal & transcendental, and pre-human rather than post-human.
1. Facts : Scientific “facts” are statements about the world that are empirically verifiable or theoretically undeniable. The term does not apply to ideas that are unverifiable or transcend physical reality. Hard Science Facts are considered to be superior to personal opinions or committee interpretations. However, the fringes of “hard” science, and the “soft” sciences must make do with debatable best guesses (hypotheses) in order to make progress toward harder facts. As long as their provisional nature is acknow-ledged they can serve as temporary assumptions.
3. Protection & Providence Most religious practices are ritualized attempts to obtain divine defense against evil, or miraculous provision of desiderata that seem unobtainable by ordinary means. For example, since the 1960s, bumper stickers urged “Pray for deliverance from the scourge of drugs”. But, like most prayers, this one seems to have fallen on deaf ears.
4. Communal Christianity : The original disciples of Jesus lived communally, and expected the new kingdom to come imminently. When that didn’t happen, the Roman version of Christianity set-up for the long haul, and abandoned communal life, except for monasteries. The quote below sounds like it could have come from the pen of Karl Marx. “Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common. . . . There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. “ Acts 4 : 32-35
Non-theist Alternative Deism is non-religious in that it is not a collective belief system or social activity. It’s non-theist in that its deity is more like a cosmic force or principle than a supernatural humanoid king. The Deist philosophy is an alternative to most traditional religions only in the sense that it provides the kernel for a trans-cendent worldview, by which you can guide your life. It’s entirely up to you to determine specific beliefs & practices that meet your personal needs and your local situation. Belief in a non-inter-vening deity will not bring any magic into your life, or answers to your prayers, or healing of diseases, or contact with deceased loved-ones. It will not provide protection from demonic attacks, or bad luck, or evil people. It won’t offer you salvation from eternal damnation.
NEXT
BACK
Forum
