logical deism?

[RandFan]

I liked Franko, there were times when he was reasonable and had some good arguments IMO. I also liked undercover Elephant, Win and a few others who all came to the same end. Mostly I miss UCE's "#5" and Franko's "TLOP".

 

[BillyJoe]

From Franko's Website

I am a Logical Deist. There is a growing number of us on the web.

In short, a logical deist is a Skeptic, a Fatalist, and an Optimist.

If there is evidence that a thing is true ? we say it is true.

If there is evidence that a thing is false ? we say it is false.

But if there is no evidence, or not enough information to decide (clearly) one way or the other ? we say there is not enough information to make a decision (we say we are Agnostic on the particular issue).

Logical deists are diametrically opposed to the A-Theists, and their whack-o-belief system (lack of belief). To put it bluntly the A-Theists are a joke. They claim there is no "God", but then when you ask them who or what "god" is they are unable to define it. How they are able to divine that a thing they cannot define does not exist is a mystery to me, but it seems that when you seriously begin to question an A-Theist you find that they have all sorts of mystical and magical beliefs.

Logical Deists believe that "Consciousness makes Matter" as opposed to the A-Theists-Psuedo-Materialist belief that "Matter makes Consciousness". All of the evidence indicates that the former is true, while there is No Evidence to support the latter belief.

Logical Deists are also Fatalist (i.e. hard core Determinist). We do not believe in the concept of "free will". Reality is governed by a set of objective Laws (i.e. the Laws of Physics). One of these laws "Gravity" binds us all, including "God". But the other 3 laws (weak nuclear, strong nuclear, and electro-magnetism) are merely the creation and mechanism of control of the Almighty.

The Logical Deists define "God" as "A Superior entity capable of generating a universe". Many Logical Deists (although not all) also believe the evidence indicates that "God" is gender female (i.e. a Goddess).

The Logical Deists also believe in the concept of the soul. In fact, it is an integral part of the philosophy. To a Logical Deist, one's soul is the manifestation of ones "Graviton" (essentially One Soul = One Graviton). In uber-reality (The "Omniverse" ), we are all simply particles obeying the laws of Gravity (ergo: Fate). This universe is an elaboration of that reality created and transmitted by the "Top Graviton" (i.e. "God", or as the LD call Her "The Logical Goddess").

Most important of all though is that Logical Deism promotes 3 ideas above all others:
1) It is better to exist then to not exist.
2) Individuality is a preferable state to conformity.
3) Optimism, the truth is always beneficial.

This is a brief and incomplete summary done spur of the moment. If anyone has any questions please feel free to ask.

Also, please do not misunderstand my intentions. I am not here to recruit for LD or convert anyone to my beliefs. I am simply here to test and exchange ideas with other like-minded, freethinking individuals.

BillyJoe

 

[Iacchus]

Logical Deists are also Fatalist (i.e. hard core Determinist). We do not believe in the concept of "free will". Reality is governed by a set of objective Laws (i.e. the Laws of Physics). One of these laws "Gravity" binds us all, including "God". But the other 3 laws (weak nuclear, strong nuclear, and electro-magnetism) are merely the creation and mechanism of control of the Almighty.

This is the only thing that I have any real contention with, except possibly the part about God's gender. It doesn't bother me for him to say this, however. Yes, I too am a hard core Determinist, when it comes to cause-and-effect that is. Yet it speaks nothing of the will of the Creator which, by all necessity must be free. Does that make sense? If so, then it's only logical that the will of the Creator should proceed throughout all things? Perhaps this is what gives rise to quantum physics?

 

[c4ts]

He finally made a website.

 

[BillyJoe]

The following all sound reasonable to me.....

In short, a logical deist is a Skeptic, a Fatalist, and an Optimist.

If there is evidence that a thing is true ? we say it is true.

If there is evidence that a thing is false ? we say it is false.

But if there is no evidence, or not enough information to decide (clearly) one way or the other ? we say there is not enough information to make a decision (we say we are Agnostic on the particular issue).

Logical Deists are also Fatalist (i.e. hard core Determinist). We do not believe in the concept of "free will". Reality is governed by a set of objective Laws (i.e. the Laws of Physics).

Most important of all though is that Logical Deism promotes 3 ideas above all others:
1) It is better to exist then to not exist.
2) Individuality is a preferable state to conformity.
3) Optimism, the truth is always beneficial.

BillyJoe

 

[c4ts]

The following all sound reasonable to me.....

BillyJoe

Tell me if this is reasonable:

Logical Deists are also Fatalist (i.e. hard core Determinist). We do not believe in the concept of "free will". Reality is governed by a set of objective Laws (i.e. the Laws of Physics).

Individuality is a preferable state to conformity.

How can there be individuality if there is no such thing as free will?

Also, have you found the part on the site that explains how the fact that there are physical laws would negate free will?

And then there is this little gem:

If there is evidence that a thing is false ? we say it is false.

How is this logically possible?

 

[Checkmite]

Many Logical Deists (although not all) also believe the evidence indicates that "God" is gender female (i.e. a Goddess).

Yeah, he said that a lot. It's really too bad he always changed the subject before explaining exactly what that evidence was.

 

[Upchurch]

Yeah, he said that a lot. It's really too bad he always changed the subject before explaining exactly what that evidence was.

Graviton particle spin, obviously.

 

[c4ts]

And naturally he shows ALL his math, but not on the site, not to those silly no-good browsing A-theists who couldn't identify a spinor field if it hit them in the butt...

 

[BillyJoe]

c4ts

How can there be individuality if there is no such thing as free will?

Fortunately, the illusion of self and the illusion of free will seem real enough to work pretty well.

How is this [If there is evidence that a thing is false ? we say it is false] logically possible?

Not sure what you mean. Flat Earth has been proved false, and so we say it is false.

BJ

 

[Diamond]

His name is Fred Nojd, apparently.

I'd say the layout of the website as well as the articles, says a lot about his mental state, don't you think? Acute paranoid schizophrenia would be close.

last modified Mar. 30 '02

 

[c4ts]

c4ts

Fortunately, the illusion of self and the illusion of free will seem real enough to work pretty well.

Then individualism is also illusory, since who you are depends entirely on external forces that compell you to think you have identity.

Not sure what you mean. Flat Earth has been proved false, and so we say it is false.

BJ

There is no specific evidence that the Earth is NOT flat, just evidence that the Earth is round. Someone could argue it only appears round in pictures, or that magical perspective elves flatten the Earth while you stand on it, (etc)...

 

[RandFan]

There is no specific evidence that the Earth is NOT flat, just evidence that the Earth is round. Someone could argue it only appears round in pictures, or that magical perspective elves flatten the Earth while you stand on it, (etc)...

Ehhhh... By this logic there is no proof of anything. Now we should point out that science hold that there is no absolute proof of anything but there is just too much evidence that the earth is round. Too many events show demonstrate that the earth is round. Yes, I get your point and the sentiment especially the part about the elves.

I should point out that my Debate teacher once had a person who was not a student come to class to argue that the earth was flat. We knew ahead of time what the debate was going to be and we came up with the best arguments we had. The guy was outstanding and blew us all away. Of course he carried the day with fallacy and spin but it taught us that debate need not rely on facts to be good.

 

[BillyJoe]

c4ts,

Then individualism is also illusory, since who you are depends entirely on external forces that compell you to think you have identity.

Yes, that is the case, but what I was saying is that the illusion feels so completely real that it doesn't matter that it is not actually real. In other words, the "forces that compell you to think you have an identity" are so hidden from view and so impossible to analyse that it feels exactly as if you actually have an identity.

There is no specific evidence that the Earth is NOT flat, just evidence that the Earth is round. Someone could argue it only appears round in pictures, or that magical perspective elves flatten the Earth while you stand on it, (etc)...

Okay, I get your point. Something being not true is merely a corrollary of proving that something else is true. Okay, wipe that one from my list (as well as the one about agnosticism).

BJ

 

[MRC_Hans]

For member privacy sake, I'm not going to go into any details. Suffice it to say that in my opinion, I see very little evidence, other than a commonality of view point, that they are the same person.

I'm not saying that I can not be (or have not been) fooled. It is entirely possible that they are the same person, but I think the solid evidence is lacking.

I think that both could be true. Originally, Wraith was almost certainly a sockpuppet. I don't put so much faith in Fanko actually admitting it, as he once did, but he made several slips, posting under the wrong ID. This is the greatest danger when maintaing a sockpuppet (yes, I had one once, before it became illegal). Also, Wraith was merely echoing Franko's posts. Later, they started to have more distinct personalities, and they also started to post at different times. I suspect Franko at some point handed over the Wraith account to somebody else. Mind you, all this were at a time when sockpuppets were legal (or at least not explicitly forbidden).

Hans

 

[hammegk]

His name is Fred Nojd, apparently.

I'd say the layout of the website as well as the articles, says a lot about his mental state, don't you think? Acute paranoid schizophrenia would be close.

I have doubt that that website is by the JREF Franko.