rational rejection of supernatural mythologies



Adeism is the certainty that supernatural beings or forces neither exist nor could interfere with the physical realm without becoming part of the physical.Adeism is based on logical analysis of relevant physical and psychological evidence and does not itself constitute a religion. Critical analysis of the evidence indicates that it is neither necessary nor rational to evoke supernatural pseudo-explanations for the origin of the universe (cosmology), the origin of life on Earth (abiogenesis), or biological complexity (evolution).  

Although concepts of supernatural beings or forces exist, neither these conceptualizations themselves nor personal belief, no matter how fervent, in the conceptualized agents constitutes evidence for ascribed existence of a supernatural agency.



  1. This is NOT the definition for adeist that I coined in 2003. Adeism is the word I chose to describe the weak-atheist position of unbelief in supernatural beings. I hope you take this down, because I’m going to promote the usage of adeism as I coined it.

    Comment by synthetikrose | July 6, 2008 | Reply

  2. Sorry, but I am *not* taking it down because I disagree with your definition, even if you did coin it earlier than I.

    While searching for an official definition for the term that I wished to adopt, I found, as recently as 2007, that there was *no officially accepted* definition of adeism.

    I think that I found your definition on an atheist message board, where you had previously posted a paper that you’d submitted for a course. Your position, as I recall, was just to the atheist side of agnosticism. I found the paper quite interesting, but disagreed with your terminology for the following reasons:

    If deism is the weakest form of ‘theism’, then I see refusal to believe in *even* the weakest position as being the strongest form of atheism. The opposite of weak is strong. Deism, as I see it, was a hedge position that snuck the concept of supernatural past the censors by essentially saying “God got it started, but the lack of evidence of His interference is explained by his voluntarily giving up interference.” This contrives to make room for a supernatural creator and attempts to put God beyond question or examination. It’s a theistic notwithstanding clause.

    I don’t buy *even* that contrived position. My strongly atheist position on this could be summed up by the term ‘adeism’. Basically, as soon as any agent interferes with the physical world, then that agent is necessarily *of* the physical world. The supernatural is a pseudocategory invented by humans to explain away the patently obvious noninterference of a deity in any physical events (which includes psychological events).

    As you can tell by my delay in posting, I have neglected this blog, so you need not worry that hordes of people are reading my definition.

    I can’t stop you from promoting your usage of ‘adeism’ and like VHS, you just might prevail over Beta because most people don’t think the logic through to the obvious conclusion.

    Comment by mythbuster | September 28, 2008 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: