Edwina: Again, your attempt to trivialize all other approaches to justifying belief in God by insisting that the Five Ways constitute THE "basic theistic argument" is in my view invalid.
John C.: Deism is usually characterized as the view that God created the universe in the distant past, but has not been involved in it ever since, the typical analogy being someone who winds up a watch and then lets it go. By contrast, Peirce held that "The creation of the universe ... did not take place during a certain busy week, in the year 4004 B.C., but is going on today and never will be done" (CP 1.615, EP 2:255; 1903). Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 8:04 AM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > John, list: > > That's my point. To declare that one person's semantic term of God=Mind > means that they are a 'theist' is not an Argument. > > JAS's attempt to trivialize the basic theistic argument for the reality of > God [the Five Ways] by reducing it to merely 'one view' and thus, to > elevate Peirce's semantic equivalence to a basic argument, is, in my view > invalid. > > Edwina > > On Sun 13/05/18 8:50 AM , John Collier [email protected] sent: > > It seems to me that Peirce was a deist of some sort, but I am not > especially familiar with any details he has written on religious belief > except in the references to the reality of God. I am afraid I do not find > these arguments coherent with anything I was taught to be God. > > John > >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
