Leon Eden

I like rationalist philosophy. It’s negligent to suggest there’s no potential of nature reflecting the best possible foundational outcome. How so?

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

The real theological question, isn’t is there God, it is what is God? #Philosophy

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

It all depends on what they think about ‘I do not believe there is not a God’.

[MrWesford @Tsar_Martyr]

“I do not believe there is a God”

Is an effing claim.

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

There are certainly some moral facts.

[Nick M @m966021]

Change my mind: morality is objective

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

It’s the only honest position.

[God Questioner @God_Questioner]

Is agnosticism intellectual honesty or just refusal to commit to an uncomfortable answer?

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

Time is not required for change, if there is a first cause brute fact means to spacetime itself.

[Magnetic Curses (Sulley) @KangintheNorth]

@leonheden But now answer my question since I answered yours

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

What is the means to spacetime? Does it feel satisfactory to simply say spacetime always existed and didn’t need a cause?

[Magnetic Curses (Sulley) @KangintheNorth]

@leonheden Is time required for change?

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

No, spacetime is a contingent thing isn’t it?

[Magnetic Curses (Sulley) @KangintheNorth]

@leonheden So then god went from not creating to creating

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

I think the only logically coherent answer is to say yes ie. there has to be an element of creating for there to be a created.

[Magnetic Curses (Sulley) @KangintheNorth]

@leonheden Did it go from not created to created?

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

There is a creating of what is created, but the creating itself has no further explanation.

[God Questioner @God_Questioner]

Everything has a creator, but God doesn't?

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

It’s basically about uniting theology with philosophy ie. what is the truth being the subject in hand. Yes, you can argue Spinoza was an atheist, but you can equally argue he was theist, and ‘atheism’ is a misnomer. :)

[Wooster Jeeves @WoosterJeeves2]

well Spinoza was arguably an atheist. and thats fine you can define god as a fact i suppose (youd have to flesh out what that actually even means) but that means you cant go around making any of the normal claims made about god. so whats the point of defining that as god? thats not what atheists reject. its not what most theists reject. its not what god means in normal language. you can stipulate this definition of god but why? why not just talk about facts? and just like your definition of god as truth what happens here if were deflationary on facts?

like this just seems like a very weird thing to do. this isnt what basically anybody in the modern world means by god. like youre just pointing at a thing and saying "thats god" when almost nobody means that thing when they say god. its just not what is being discussed when anybody discusses god. it feels almost identical to jordan petersons "atheists dont understand what theyre rejecting when they reject god" and then just defining god as "the thing you prioritize above all other things". like thats just not what anybody but peterson means by god.

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

There is a fact, isn’t there? You can legitimately call that God. Spinoza did, or are you suggesting that definition of God should be cancelled?

[Wooster Jeeves @WoosterJeeves2]

this doesnt respond to any of what i said.

in order to say that the fundamental reality is god you need to show that it has the properties we generally associate with god (eg omnipotence omniscience omnibenevolence perfection necessity agency etc)

and in order to even talk about "the fundamental reality" you need to show that there even is one.

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

Yes, I agree with that, but that’s not the term ‘God’ being ambiguous. Particular theories of God may or may not be so.

[Miska @MiskaKuusela]

@leonheden But "God is X" or X is God" is an unfounded truth claim about (unambiguous) foundational truth.

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

The reality may be a brute fact, but that’s a descriptive element of the foundation.

[Wooster Jeeves @WoosterJeeves2]

ok but then god just is reality and youre just equivocating on god. like that doesnt entail really any of the qualities of god. it cant be conscious, have knowledge, have powers, be moral, etc. and its not maximally great or perfect. in what sense is it anything like any conception of god?

also if were deflationary on existence (which is a view im very tempted by) the idea of a foundational reality is literally incoherent nonsense

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

Er, it is if that’s what you define it as.

[Miska @MiskaKuusela]

@leonheden I know you do, but it’s not a fact

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

I don’t think ‘foundational truth’ is ambiguous. It means what is the foundational reality

[Wooster Jeeves @WoosterJeeves2]

@leonheden but thats still just as ambiguous as truth because its defined relative to our definition of truth

also plenty of people are deflationary on truth

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

I’m meaning God as the fact itself.

[Miska @MiskaKuusela]

@leonheden It doesn’t depend on what the facts are. It depends on what you set ”god” to be”

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

The word ‘truth’ is more ambiguous than the word ‘God’ (as best defined), as ‘God’ more precisely means the ‘foundational truth’.

[Wooster Jeeves @WoosterJeeves2]

@leonheden but if you define god as the truth then theres literally no difference its just a different word for the same thing.

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

By that I trust you mean holds a faith position in one overriding foundational belief eg. hard naturalism included?

[God Questioner @God_Questioner]

He is extremely religious.

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

The problem with the word truth, is it itself is ambiguous. God is actually a more concise world than the word truth in itself.

[Mostly Replies 🥍🤷‍♂️⚛️ @mostlyreplies]

@leonheden If your definition of God is merely a metaphor for something else, there's a name for that.

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

Do you mean you think a limited God would be lame?

[Miska @MiskaKuusela]

@leonheden No, the other way around

[Leon Eden @leonheden]

That depends upon what the fact is.

[Miska @MiskaKuusela]

@leonheden Didn't say it's lame for facts, just lame for a god