Personal explanation makes for animism-that superstition.

· Uncategorized
Authors

Animism is  belief that spirits lie behind natural forces. Why did the tile fall of the roof? The wind spirit made the wind make it fall. That we know is superstitious, but  the Azande still go for it and also for the germ spirit now.

We know that is superstitious, because we realize that winds don’t depend on spirits but instead on other natural forces of Nature. Yet, the superstitious see the pareidolias of teleology and design when only teleonomy and patterns are at work. That,too, is superstition.

Richard Swinburne and William Lane Craig affirm that Nature requires a pesonal explanation in the form of God. Alexander Smoltczyk, German journalist, prattles that He is neither a principle  nor a personal being nor an entity but instead the Ultimate Explanation  [Primary Cause], yet not being the latter two, He would not be able to instantiate Himself as that explanation. Apologists thus disagree about Him as a personal being.

Craig maintains that it was possible for other events to take place, but because the Cosmos is as it is, ti’s God who decides amongst possiblities what  happens. No, teleonomy proceeds by actions happening permitting still others as science so notes. No divine intent led to the demise of  the dinosaurs that led to small primates evolving to be us nor for the flowering plants and the warming-off period that helped give rise to us. Necessity and chance rule.

Keith Parsons notes :” Occult power willed by a transcendent being in an inscrutable manner for unfathomable purposes does not seem to be any sort of a good answer.” How does He use His intent? By the magic of let it be? Supernaturalists just  assume that they can just define Him with certain attributes, then perforce He can be omni-God. Without any empirical basis, that is just gasconade,bluster!

Thus theism is just the superstition of reduced animism. Theists themselves make the genetic argument against their other arguments in that they use the unsubstantiated arguments from happiness-purpose and from angst so that we rationalists/naturalists can indeed make  our genetic ones! Thus, Hume, Feuerbach, Freud and others are right about how theism arises without denying with that argumentation eviscerates theists’ arguments and thus, do not make the genetic argument!

That personal explanation is no more than the pareidolias of divine intent and design instead of the reality of teleonomy-no intent- and patterns for reduced animism!

What might you add to this commentary? Any dissent?

Make this blog your place to let others know what you think about naturalism versus supernaturalism!

 

 

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: