Atheists/Agnostics: How Much Sense Does God Make?

[KCfromNC]

Again I see you're rejecting a specific conception of God, namely that he has desires. Thomas Aquinas made a good case that God doesn't have desires (divine impassability), and biologically it makes sense: you need a brain and body to have desires.

Does that rule out this god having a desire to be worshiped? And a desire for its creations to follow its laws? Seems like if you rule out things like desires, plans, feeling and intentions since those are only things which beings with brains and bodies have you're not left with much of a god.

 

[KCfromNC]

There's no winning, here. If you reject God in an abstract way, you haven't provided enough specifics. If you reject a specific God, you haven't rejected God in the abstract. The "gotcha" is always forthcoming.

It also gets back to the "you're not considering a god which no one actually believes in" point. Ask a random Christian their take on divine impassability or whatever and you'll get blank stares - that sort of stuff is simply not what believers actually believe in.

 

[Received]

Surely you understand why I'm making this argument, don't you? Your first sentence in your OP was...

"For the sake of this poll, God refers to a personal, interventionist God, and not an Eastern, pantheistic, God-is-the-universe conception. "

Are you saying now that I should drop this point? After all, a personal god must choose to be personal....an interventionist god must choose to intervene. Unless you want to argue that god does these things randomly without motive (without desire)...then I'm left with a god who is neither of those things.

Well, the "personal" distinction was to contrast it with "non-personal" conceptions, personal meaning relatable. I think there are difficulties with using this term literally, but that's another discussion.

It seems like you're saying that unless a person has a desire to do something, his actions are random, and that motivation is equivalent to desire?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Well, the "personal" distinction was to contrast it with "non-personal" conceptions, personal meaning relatable. I think there are difficulties with using this term literally, but that's another discussion.

Well it's about to become a part of this discussion lol. I don't see a way to proceed without knowing what you meant by "personal".

It seems like you're saying that unless a person has a desire to do something, his actions are random, and that motivation is equivalent to desire?

Yeah, at their core...motivations are based in desires of some sort. Can you provide an example of something god does that you think isn't based in desire?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Even though I think that we actually have relationships with our ideas of others, not with them...

I'm inclined to think that it is our idea of ourselves that actually has relationships with our ideas of others

 

[Received]

Well it's about to become a part of this discussion lol. I don't see a way to proceed without knowing what you meant by "personal".



Yeah, at their core...motivations are based in desires of some sort. Can you provide an example of something god does that you think isn't based in desire?

Eh, well, I'd say everything, seeing how desire reflects biology, and God doesn't have biology. I think motivations involve desires for human beings, and that lacking motivation makes it extremely hard but not impossible to do things. Actually, it's precisely the things that we're not motivated to do that we get the most credit for. The whole deal with God not having motivations or desires is that he acts purely according to reason or what is conceived as the best good. I don't think we have motivation or desires when doing math problems, and I think something like this is approaching how God solves problems or goes about doing things.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

... I don't think we have motivation or desires when doing math problems, and I think something like this is approaching how God solves problems or goes about doing things.

But we have motivations or desires to do math problems, otherwise we wouldn't do them; that's the point.

 

[Received]

But we have motivations or desires to do math problems, otherwise we wouldn't do them; that's the point.

Okay, I looked into it a little closer. To have a motive means to have a reason for doing something, therefore this isn't necessarily the same as a desire.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Eh, well, I'd say everything, seeing how desire reflects biology, and God doesn't have biology. I think motivations involve desires for human beings, and that lacking motivation makes it extremely hard but not impossible to do things.

I don't think that a lack of biology avoids the problem at all. Let's use the creation of the universe as an example...you're saying god created the universe without wanting to do so? Why do it then? The only motivations I can come up with are rooted in desire or instinct...and instinct would imply that it's not a choice. It's the idea of choice that implies a desire or want...biology or not.

Actually, it's precisely the things that we're not motivated to do that we get the most credit for. The whole deal with God not having motivations or desires is that he acts purely according to reason or what is conceived as the best good.

Well why? Why does he choose to act upon the "best good"? Does he have no ability to do otherwise? If we reduce him to some mindless automaton this line of reasoning might work....but we're back to a very impersonal god.

I don't think we have motivation or desires when doing math problems, and I think something like this is approaching how God solves problems or goes about doing things.

Of course we have desires for doing math problems.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Okay, I looked into it a little closer. To have a motive means to have a reason for doing something, therefore this isn't necessarily the same as a desire.

Not exactly the same; but a desire is 'a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen', so a desire can be, and often is, a motive; e.g. the motive for working hard is the desire for wealth & success.

 

[Received]

Not exactly the same; but a desire is 'a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen', so a desire can be, and often is, a motive; e.g. the motive for working hard is the desire for wealth & success.

Yes, I agree. A desire can motivate, but to have a motive isn't limited to desire.

 

[Received]

I don't think that a lack of biology avoids the problem at all. Let's use the creation of the universe as an example...you're saying god created the universe without wanting to do so? Why do it then? The only motivations I can come up with are rooted in desire or instinct...and instinct would imply that it's not a choice. It's the idea of choice that implies a desire or want...biology or not.

"Want" is such an ambiguous term, though. It can refer to the desire to do something, or to the fact that you will something. And again, I think we often do things against our motivation, which might itself create motivation. I see this a lot with clinically depressed folks, and one of the treatments is to stop waiting for motivation or desire, and instead act "as if" you weren't depressed, the action itself creating a chain reaction of dopamine releases that creates motivation and makes a person less depressed.

So, IMV, God created the universe without a want in terms of a desire, but colloquially "wanted" to create the universe because he willed it into existence.

Well why? Why does he choose to act upon the "best good"? Does he have no ability to do otherwise? If we reduce him to some mindless automaton this line of reasoning might work....but we're back to a very impersonal god.

I don't think this makes him a mindless automaton, seeing how he's fully conscious of all his decisions.

 

[quatona]

I'm inclined to think that it is our idea of ourselves that actually has relationships with our ideas of others

Good one!
Then again, I experience often that something about me is impacting my relationships which definitely doesn´t correspond with or is even reconcilable with my idea of myself.

 

[Ana the Ist]

"Want" is such an ambiguous term, though. It can refer to the desire to do something, or to the fact that you will something.

Guh??? (That's the caveman version of "huh"...hopefully you read it in an appropriate caveman voice)

Did you leave out a word or two in that sentence? Or did you actually mean "will something"? What is "will something"? Is that something that you do? Something you think?

And again, I think we often do things against our motivation, which might itself create motivation. I see this a lot with clinically depressed folks, and one of the treatments is to stop waiting for motivation or desire, and instead act "as if" you weren't depressed, the action itself creating a chain reaction of dopamine releases that creates motivation and makes a person less depressed.

I'm not sure what you're using as an example here. It would seem rather obvious that the desire to not be depressed is the motivation for not acting depressed...in this case. Were you thinking of something else?

So, IMV, God created the universe without a want in terms of a desire, but colloquially "wanted" to create the universe because he willed it into existence.

I'll wait for your response to my question about "will something" before I respond to this...as it's now clear you meant to write that.

I don't think this makes him a mindless automaton, seeing how he's fully conscious of all his decisions.

 

[Received]

Guh??? (That's the caveman version of "huh"...hopefully you read it in an appropriate caveman voice)

Did you leave out a word or two in that sentence? Or did you actually mean "will something"? What is "will something"? Is that something that you do? Something you think?

"Will" is meant as a verb. To will is to do. Thinking can also be controlled by will.

I'm not sure what you're using as an example here. It would seem rather obvious that the desire to not be depressed is the motivation for not acting depressed...in this case. Were you thinking of something else?

Far from it. Depression is an illness with serious frontal lobe downregulation, which means the person has little motivation for pretty much anything. Depressives seem more inclined to wait for motivation to push them along (which usually perpetuates depression), rather than act against the grain of their motivations (or lack thereof). So I used this as an example for how we sometimes need to push against our motivation (or act when motivation isn't present) in order to reach a palatable outcome.

 

[Ana the Ist]

"Will" is meant as a verb. To will is to do. Thinking can also be controlled by will.

I can't say I'm familiar with that definition...and after checking with Merriam Webster, it doesn't seem to be common enough to be in there as a verb.

Could you elaborate then? What would be the difference between saying "god willed the universe." and "god created the universe."?

Far from it. Depression is an illness with serious frontal lobe downregulation, which means the person has little motivation for pretty much anything. Depressives seem more inclined to wait for motivation to push them along (which usually perpetuates depression), rather than act against the grain of their motivations (or lack thereof). So I used this as an example for how we sometimes need to push against our motivation (or act when motivation isn't present) in order to reach a palatable outcome.

I don't see how this changes my point. You're saying that your depressed patients act to end their depression...but they don't want to act to end their depression?

 

[Received]

I can't say I'm familiar with that definition...and after checking with Merriam Webster, it doesn't seem to be common enough to be in there as a verb.

Could you elaborate then? What would be the difference between saying "god willed the universe." and "god created the universe."?

Yeah, dictionaries sometimes don't capture complicated philosophical positions (which I'm doing a poor job of elucidating). To say that God willed the universe means, basically, that he created it. To will is to act, to do something freely.

I don't see how this changes my point. You're saying that your depressed patients act to end their depression...but they don't want to act to end their depression?

Yes. Your view seems to be that motivation in the sense of desire is needed for action to be possible. I'm saying that with many people, depressed or not, it's required to act against the grain of motivation (or when it's lacking entirely) in order to do the best thing.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yeah, dictionaries sometimes don't capture complicated philosophical positions (which I'm doing a poor job of elucidating). To say that God willed the universe means, basically, that he created it. To will is to act, to do something freely.

Then why bring it up? If it basically means that he created the universe...why not just say he created the universe?

It doesn't change the question of why he created the universe. Does he not have a reason? Because again, if we're continuing with this concept of a god who does things without reasons why...then we're back again to a very impersonal/non-interventionist god.

Yes. Your view seems to be that motivation in the sense of desire is needed for action to be possible. I'm saying that with many people, depressed or not, it's required to act against the grain of motivation (or when it's lacking entirely) in order to do the best thing.

Why would they try to escape their depression then if they don't want to?

 

[Received]

Then why bring it up? If it basically means that he created the universe...why not just say he created the universe?

It doesn't change the question of why he created the universe. Does he not have a reason? Because again, if we're continuing with this concept of a god who does things without reasons why...then we're back again to a very impersonal/non-interventionist god.

I've lost my way, Ana. Where do you think I got the idea that God does stuff without reasons?

Why would they try to escape their depression then if they don't want to?

If "want" means desire, then we're back at square one: you're implying that they can only escape their depression if they want to, but I'm saying that it's precisely their wants (or lack of wants) that keep them trapped in their depression, and that they're required to transcend their wants by choosing despite them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Received...I see no way of dancing around this...choice implies desire/want. If we have a god who chooses to speak, then he chooses his words, and he has a want/desire to do so.

If he chooses to intervene, then he has a reason based in desire or want. If he chooses good (and believe me when I say that creating this universe is a big mistake on that part) then he has a desire or want behind that choice.

Sure, there are things that we do without motive...like breathing...but these are autonomic responses. If you're saying that god creating a universe is like an autonomic response, then we're right back to this impersonal automaton who doesn't make choices.