It ain't pretty being easy... (soopageek) wrote,
It ain't pretty being easy...
soopageek

deism

I find it inconceivable and illogical to not believe in the concept of a creator.  Deists can split hairs over the nature of god and his identity all they want, but when I see the complexity of nature and all its wonder, I'm hard pressed to believe it is some sort of random fluke.  This is not to say I'm some bible-thumper or that I believe even a fraction of the things purported and touted by orthodox religions.  I consider myself a semi-agnostic Christian.  I believe in a creator but I've yet to be convinced that there is one correct way and likely never will.  I also doubt the creator takes any active-hand in the realm of his creation, if he's even paying attention or alive.  I've always thought it was quite a terrible leap of faith to presume our creator immortal.  I'm not even convinced of an after-life, but I'm kind-of hoping. 

I think what does it for me most is human consciousness.  Some people call it the spirit.  George Lucas called it "The Force" ;-). 

Whatever you call it, it seems to transcend the basic reality of the physical world.  Some people have already claimed to have done so.  Science has yet to explain it, much less duplicate it, but that's not to say they won't.  The way I see it, science is nothing more than a belief system, which requires its own leaps of faith and its own denominations which adhere to their doctrines just as tightly and fervently in the face of contradicting information as a religious zealot, to the point that it can take generations for new beliefs to take-hold, only to be changed again by future generations.  One era's scientific fact is a future era's apology to textbook and encyclopedia writers.

Atheists balk at this concept usually, the idea of science as a belief system because of the scientific method.  Yet so much of science operates on theory and principle that it ceases to be concrete and deluding yourself that it is, isn't much worse than the creationist who insists the world was made in 6 days because a couple of ancient books say-so. 

I think the important thing to remember is that science and religion attempt to explain two very different things and don't necessarily need to be at odds with each other.  On the one hand, science makes an attempt to explain how things work.  Religion, on the other hand, makes an attempt to explain the "Big Why": why are we here and for what purpose?. 

Some people of science have little use for the notion of why and for what purpose and choose to discard the notions entirely.  Since it cannot be explained by science it must not exist. 

Some people of religion have little use for the notion of how things work and similarily discard the notion entirely.  Since it cannot be divined from the texts of yore, it must be the work of God with which man would be wise not to tinker. 

I find either view a little limiting.
Tags: opinion
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 19 comments