# David Deutsch: A new way to explain explanation



## ambush80 (May 12, 2017)




----------



## JB0704 (May 12, 2017)

I had to open the thread on account of the fellas name.......guess I need to watch the video now also.


----------



## ambush80 (May 13, 2017)

JB0704 said:


> I had to open the thread on account of the fellas name.......guess I need to watch the video now also.



Deutsch is an amazing thinker.


----------



## ambush80 (May 13, 2017)

At 12:42

"Without a functional reason to prefer one of countless variants, advocating one of them in preference to the others is irrational"

Applying this to how one chooses which God(s) to believe in or whether to believe in a God at all is at the heart of many of our discussions.  The most resilient, enduring argument that's been given is "Something supernatural must be responsible for everything natural."

Try to define that supernatural thing. Try to make sense while you do it. As Deutsch recommends, use observation (honestly) to explain the unseen. Rigorously and critically examine the source for your theory. See if _anything else_ can easily be inserted for your "Supernatural thing".  If something can easily take the place of your explanation, then your explanation is a bad one.


----------



## ambush80 (May 13, 2017)

15:08


"The search for hard to vary explanations is the origin of all progress.  It's the basic regulating principle of The Enlightenment".  

On explanationless theories:

"Whenever you're told that some existing statistical trend will continue, but you aren't given a hard to vary account of what causes that trend, you're being told a wizard did it".


----------



## bullethead (May 18, 2017)

D D has a way of saying complex things in more simple terms.


----------



## ambush80 (May 18, 2017)

bullethead said:


> D D has a way of saying complex things in more simple terms.



The words are so simple (he hardly ever uses a word that's more than three syllables long) and yet every word is so full of meaning.  His ideas are far reaching.


----------



## ky55 (May 21, 2017)

ambush80 said:


> Deutsch is an amazing thinker.



Yes he is.


----------



## jmharris23 (May 25, 2017)

He does have a great mind for sure.


----------



## jmharris23 (May 25, 2017)

Does the biblical God and science HAVE to be at odds?


----------



## ambush80 (May 25, 2017)

jmharris23 said:


> Does the biblical God and science HAVE to be at odds?



Yes. Because the Bible makes very specific claims about physical reality; things it claims REALLY happened, that are at odds with what science has revealed.  The only way that I can see them being compatible is if one were to take all the miracle claims (including the resurrection) and call them allegory or metaphor, like what Jefferson tried to do or like what Jordan Peterson (who is unapologetic about being a Christian) does.  I know you're capable of imagining a world where the contemporary view of the resurrection could be seen as allegory.  I imagine you may already do that with some of the miracle claims.  It wouldn't change the message of "Love your neighbor" one bit.


----------



## jmharris23 (May 25, 2017)

ambush80 said:


> Yes. Because the Bible makes very specific claims about physical reality; things it claims REALLY happened, that are at odds with what science has revealed.  The only way that I can see them being compatible is if one were to take all the miracle claims (including the resurrection) and call them allegory or metaphor, like what Jefferson tried to do or like what Jordan Peterson (who is unapologetic about being a Christian) does.  I know you're capable of imagining a world where the contemporary view of the resurrection could be seen as allegory.  I imagine you may already do that with some of the miracle claims.  It wouldn't change the message of "Love your neighbor" one bit.



No I don't. I think they really happened.  


That said, thanks for the answer and I wasn't really thinking in this vein when I asked the question although I should have. 

I was thinking more along the lines of what Deutsch was talking about as far as how the world (weather, winds, temp, etc.) works. 

I wasn't thinking about miracles. Obviously yes those are at odds with science if you dont believe that God is a God of science.


----------



## ambush80 (May 25, 2017)

jmharris23 said:


> No I don't. I think they really happened.
> 
> 
> That said, thanks for the answer and I wasn't really thinking in this vein when I asked the question although I should have.
> ...



We are thinking of it in the same way and so is Deutsch.


----------

