You say that it is not craziness that causes spirituality by saying that it is unlike schizophrenia, but saying that it is disimilar to another brain disorder does not make it not "crazy". A "crazy" thought process may be common throughout our species and although it may not seem strange from our perspective it does not mean that this thought process is an accurate perception of the physical world. Do you see the error in this thinking?
Yes, of course I do. But I don't think there is actually an "accurate" perception of the physical world to begin with. That's why I didn't get involved with psychiatry, because I think it's bullshit to try to push this "standard model of the physical world" on everybody. We're all wired different. I think quantum physics is really helping people open up to the idea that "not all is what it seems." And it's also sort of taking over that weirdness that was once a part of spiritual tradition and adding it to science. There are a lot of concepts in quantum mechanics that make people go "bullshit!" But the math is there.
Because your ''revelation'' came based on your own thoughts, intuitions, and opinions, you realize your atheistic beliefs are ENTIRELY based on faith ALONE, right? Also, just so you know, that doesn't even matter, because you are not an atheist. What you have just described is agnosticism.
Atheism is the lack of belief in gods. Agnosticism is a statement of knowledge. Get yo' terms straight.
bro u got it twisted... atheism means you believe there is no god/s. agnosticism is the lack of beliefs due to the lack of knowledge.
I do believe your quite wrong, I think as we grow into adults we become more and more ignorant to the reality of things. Little kids see the universe for what it really is, A beautiful place to just be happy and not have a care in the world. We cloud our minds with modern-day worries. I personally blame it on technology myself.
Do yourselves a favor, and don't keep arguing about whether atheism is an empty set, is making a positive claim, and how that relates to agnosticism, etc. It's just semantics, and neither terminology systems are perfect for describing one's beliefs (or lack thereof). If you've communicated what your stance is, leave it at that. If you've misunderstood what someone's stance is, ask for clarification without attempting to rectify what you perceive as incorrect terminology. Semantics are not worth arguing over. Trust me on this, I'm a part of another forum that deals with philosophy and spirituality and it'll become the focus of almost every thread if you let it.
I agree with you about organized religion. Although I don't subscribe to specific "religious" beliefs, I definitely wouldn't consider myself an atheist. I just don't want to follow some huge institution's view of what God is. I think there is a life force that exists in the universe in some way. If everything that exists originated from one source (God, or whatever you may call it) then it would follow that everything that exists contains part of that Source. The Earth is a giant living organism. Everything that lives on it, works with it to perpetuate more life. Well.. everything except our modern industrial society. But, we evolved just like any other animal evolved- working with the laws of nature to continue our existence. I really believe that if we actually lived in harmony with the Earth, instead of destroying it and only looking at it in terms of use, or "resources," we would be much happier and we wouldn't need these religions to tell us the purpose of life.
You are right in some respects. But it is a bit more nuanced than how you described. Most atheists do not assert that gods do not exist, rather, they say that they do not have a positive belief in them. In other words, they lack the belief that gods do actually exist. These atheists are labeled "weak" or "negative" atheists. The other atheists, much fewer in number, actively assert their "positive" or "strong" belief in the nonexistence of any gods. Atheism is a statement of belief (or lackthereof) in gods. The question that agnosticism or gnosticism answers is slightly different. When you are discussing the actual knowledge of a claim, then you may discuss one's agnosticism or gnosticism. Agnosticism is the position that someone's knowledge about the existence of gods is limited and the information that is currently had is either not clear or nonexistent. In other words, it is a position of "I don't know; I do not have all of the information." Gnosticism is the stance that states: "I positively do know and have evidence for the existence of gods". Again, it is a claim of knowledge. This is slightly different than a belief that may or may not be based upon knowledge. Agnostic atheism is not a contradiction in terms. The terms are not mutually exclusive. You can have gnostic or even agnostic theists (people who believe that a god or gods exist(s), but do not assert that they have the adequate knowledge to substantiate that belief). This is why I said "Atheism is the lack of belief in gods. (...because most atheists hold this belief) Agnosticism is a statement of knowledge. (...this is "always" true, although I have heard people say that a claim to knowledge cannot be absolutely certain, so it is at its fundamental level still a belief)" I guess this got long winded...
You are 100% incorrect. If you say you are a-theist, you are saying that you believe there is ABSOLUTELY NOT a God. Not having a "positive belief in them" is exactly what we're talking about. Theism vs atheist vs agnosticism. I think YOU are VERY confused. Agnosticism is any lack of belief in deity based on lack of evidence or personal revelation. Atheism is the position that there is MOST CERTAINLY not a God (atheism is 100% based on faith, since there is 0 evidence to support it's primary tenet.) Theism is the ''positive belief'' you were speaking about earlier, of course. It's truly a shame that there are so many atheists out there that don't even know they're not atheists but agnostics. If they don't even know what they are, what bloody fool is going to listen to their opinion on whether there's a prime mover or not? Not all of you are that way of course, some of you are intelligent enough to realize you're agnostic. Unfortunately, agnosticism is a whole other bundle of lunacy in my opinion. "Hey, you believe in something super-natural, can you please prove it for us naturally?" <------ about sums it up
Hah! I just did what you told me not to... oops. I was careful to point out the flaws of my views because, like you said, it is ultimately a game of wordplay. Still, I think it is good to discuss because it can help people rectify a proper awareness of the terms and other conceptions of it. I may be wrong (in my opinion of the words and their meanings) but I think it would be good for me to say something and have it rebuked than keep it from the discussion table. How else would I get rid of my preconceived notions?
Hmm... maybe you have never read what atheists actually say or write? What Is Atheism? Narrow vs. Broad Definitions of Atheism: Why Do Atheists Define Atheism Broadly as the Lack of Belief in Gods? Negative and positive atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
there is a thread devoted to atheism and the semantics involved when atheists create new types of atheism with more wiggle room. http://forum.grasscity.com/spirituality-philosophy/588464-atheism-faith-based-position.html