Reply
Thu 7 Apr, 2005 03:43 am
In discussions here I have discovered that there is great confusion regarding the terms atheism and agnosticism and the great variety of views held by those who do not believe in gods.
I thought I would attempt to categorize the various positions (even though I won't be the first to try) but I'll need help. Please tell me which of these you are, or if you do not fit any of the following and why.
Theists
Non-Theist A : Has never heard of any gods and/or hasn't considered the matter
Non-Theist B : Has heard of gods but fails to be convinced of their existence.
Non-Theist C : Has heard of gods but thinks their existence is unlikely.
Non-Theist D : Has heard of gods but the nature of their existence is unknown to them, while their non-existence is unknowable.
Non-Theist E : Has heard of gods but claims to know that none exist.
Non-Theist F : Has heard of gods but has a belief system incompatible with the existence of gods.
Non-Theist G: Has heard of gods but has yet to reach any conclusions. Potentially Theists or Non-Theists
Re: Categorizing Non-Theists
Type B or C... I mean there is a chance but so small that if all it asked me to do was wiggle my left little finger once for eternal reward it wouldn't be worth it.
Re: Categorizing Non-Theists
Eorl
I am a non-theist of class F.
I believe in a physical world, I believe our intelligence is an evolutionary tool, I believe our language and concepts came from our experience of interacting with the world.
In this set of beliefs, there is no place for metaphysics, including god.
How is that not class E val ?
Edit: I get it val. I've added class F. Does that fit?
How about categorizing theists?
I don't see the categories, but it could be fun...
all yours Cyracuz.
I've already bitten off more than my share with this one.
I am afraid I don't posess the objectivity to make such an enterprize worth while... I'd just make it two categories: Zealous maniacs with spines and zealous maniacs without spines..
Excellent typology, Eorl, virtually exhaustive. I would classify myself as an "F". I do agree that, as the D thesis puts it, IF there were a god or gods, their "supernatural" nature would render them unknowable (like denizens of Kant's Noumena Realm). I feel sometmes that I "know" the gods described by human societies do not exist, but my evidence is highly inferential. For example, looking at the world ethnological record, we see that virtually every society (no matter how primitive or modern) formallly acknowledges the existence of gods, origin myths, etc. Their universality combined with their mutually contradictory differences suggests their artificiality (i.e., that they are cultural artifacts). But I can say, most objectively, that (thesis F) theism contradicts my intellectual, spiritual, and psychological conditioning. It is not in my nature to believe in any theistic thesis.
D comes closest. I also think it's closest to my conception of agnosticism. However, I don't claim the nature of Divinity is unknowable, merely that it's unknown & likely to remain unknown.
I like what
yitwail said. It is a point I have made dozens of times.
Quote:However, I don't claim the nature of Divinity is unknowable, merely that it's unknown & likely to remain unknown.
In any case, none of the selections offered quite fits the bill with me.
Here is my categorization:
I do not know if there is a God; I do not know if there are no gods; I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction.
That is the one I choose.
Frank, you are nothing if you are not consistent.
This is VERY cool Eorl.
Now I get why my previous thread was so moot. I was arguing with 10 different people about atleast 5 differing definitions.
I think my arguments were meant to address A,B,C but Frank convinced me that my argument does not apply to C.
I think it still attacks A and B.
I think the majority of you all on this board - that are non-theists (and are going to hell. Okay - a joke - I couldn't resist) do not subscribe to A and B.
TTF
p.s. I differ from a lot of Christians that I do not believe athiests are going to hell. I simply don't believe in hell. There are five different connotations in the Bible and most of them do not agree with eachother.
Jury is out for me on hell - or evil for that matter.
JLNobody wrote:Frank, you are nothing if you are not consistent.
Word JL.
Frank is not luke warm. (Rev 3:16) - better than half the luke warm theists I know.
TF
How many of 'A' do you think are out there?
MANY theistic arguments for God say that the search for God is inerent in all man. Vatican 2 referred to this concept when they went all pluralist on the Catholics.
Just a question?
TTF
I am one of the atheists denying the remote possibility of a god. I don't do it to be pugnacious. It is simply one aspect of my person.
I'mj just curious as to how you would categorize this: The upshot of a Zen Buddhist annecdote is the Zen priest saying, "I bow to god because there is no god."
Frank, how are you not Category D ?
(I had you clearly in mind when I worded it, surely I must have come close!)
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace