User Tag List

View Poll Results: What is your philosophy on God?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • Pantheism

    6 10.53%
  • Agnosticism

    7 12.28%
  • Apatheism

    2 3.51%
  • Atheism

    16 28.07%
  • Deism

    1 1.75%
  • Henotheism

    1 1.75%
  • Ignosticism

    3 5.26%
  • Monotheism

    13 22.81%
  • Panentheism

    5 8.77%
  • Polytheism

    0 0%
  • Theism

    2 3.51%
  • Transtheism

    1 1.75%
First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 81

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    After doing a bit of further research, I found out that the particular form of Pantheism I adhere to is a philosophy called Pandeism which, of course, is the perfect synthesis of Pantheism and Deism.
    Here is a site along with a description I found on the subject:
    So why have we continued, over all these centuries, to throw ourselves after false leads? Because it is only within the last few decades that the sciences have come together to paint a picture of our existence allowing us to tie together the threads of previous efforts to achieve a rational and coherent view of the spiritual basis of our Universe. The previous threads arise from two theories long thought to be at odds: Pantheism and Deism. Pantheists, in general, equate our Universe itself with "God," proposing that there is nothing more to it -- a view that was particularly defensible prior to the discovery of the Big Bang and other phenomena pointing to a moment of initiation for our Universe. Deists, in general, believe that our Universe was designed and created by a god-equivalent being -- sometimes titled the Deus, or the Creator, or the Motive Force, to distinguish it from more primitive god-concepts -- with such being setting forth a clockwork Universe, capable of developing without the ham-handed interference indicative of a less competent Creator. Deists do not depend on the obviously flawed mechanism of revelation to take their Cosmic bearings, but instead rely on a rational and logical examination of the Universe to discern its source and purpose.
    And yet, both Pantheism and Deism are insufficient; Pantheism can not explain how we came to be here or why we exist in a Universe with the peculiar capacities that ours exhibits, in particular the simple form of complexity that it engenders; nor has it much insight to offer as to our purpose of existence or our moral dimensions. Deism can explain how we came to exist but can provide no reason why an entity capable of creating such a Universe as ours would be compelled to do so, nor why such an entity would appear to abandon the Universe that it had just fashioned with such care for the details of its energetic constants. And so neither Pantheism nor Deism offers a complete solution by itself. But interposed under the light of modern science, they can be brought together to offer precisely that solution.
    https://sites.google.com/site/pandeists/

  2. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    31

    Default

    This pandeism is an interesting concept, I have thought of something similar myself. But still, it doesn't solve the chicken and egg problem. If we don't accept that the universe doesn't need a sentient creator (even a creator that just transforms itself into it), then why accept that creator didn't need to be created by someone too?

    Actually, I have a sort of philosophy of my own, though it doesn't involve deities, or at least doesn't explicitly mention them. But there's one problem - if I tried to express it in words, then probably only I would understand them correctly. Or maybe others that have reached the same conclusions on their own, but it wouldn't make much sense to anyone else. This is why I am ignostic. Words don't really mean much. Actually, the word "God" is only one of the many. A more basic example is "to exist", and it's much more limiting than "God". How can we know if we agree on anything if we don't know if our notions of existence are compatible?

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    Rad3k even if nobody fully understands your theory you should at least present it.

    You could learn something new yourself just by expressing it to synthesize your knowledge.

    I would sure be interested and even if I don't get the full picture catching even a glimpse would work.

  4. #34
    Gone Aesthete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/sx
    Posts
    385

    Default

    A mixture of Ignosticism, Henotheism, and a variety of Transtheism. I don't like putting things into classes so simply, but it will do to answer the question.
    Great men are like eagles, and build their nest on some lofty solitude.

    Schopenhauer

  5. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    Rad3k even if nobody fully understands your theory you should at least present it.

    You could learn something new yourself just by expressing it to synthesize your knowledge.

    I would sure be interested and even if I don't get the full picture catching even a glimpse would work.
    Ok, I'll try to make it as easy to understand as I can.

    The existence needs sorting out first, so here it is: First, let's assume an objective, "global" notion of existence. It's simple - everything exists. No matter how hard you try, you won't come up with something that doesn't exist, because there's simply no such a thing. As part of this "everything", there are infinitely many universes containing everything you can imagine and more. It may help to imagine that these universes exist in the same way as numbers exist - together they form a sort of continuum. Our universe (well, that's not technically correct, but I'll explain later) is there too.

    That notion of existence was precise (sort of) but not useful - it doesn't really say anything about anything. So now let's assume a subjective one - what exists for me. I do exist, obviously Everything that I can experience also exists in some way or another. Whether what I experience is "real", is a creation of my imagination, or whatever else, is irrelevant as long as there's no way of telling these scenarios apart. There are also infinitely many universes that are identical from my perspective (including some in which everything I don't see turns pink), and differ only in what is unknown to me. So either I'm in one of them, but have no way to know which one it is, or I'm actually in all of them. And, like previously, there's really no difference. The only things meaningful to me are the things that I experience. Together, these experiences form my consciousness and define me.

    If a canvas painted all black symbolized everything (in the objective sense) and a blank canvas symbolized nothing, my consciousness would be some shape. A shape carries more meaning than a single-colored (whether black or white) plane. If my consciousness was to expand indefinitely, it could at some point contain everything. And then it would be almost the same as if it contained nothing.

    It's still not all, but I'm too tired to continue now.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    If everything exists, then everything we are experiencing must have a meaningful reality of its own, and perhaps there aren't even absolutes, because if nothing can be everything, then we would have no universal measurements we could all agree upon, hence the stucture of our thoughts would be even greater than the structures of empiricism, philosophy becoming the next step we take in the chain after science carries us only so far, the question of consciousness being perhaps the greatest mystery of being, as without it, nothing would exist.

    Yes, I think you were right, I didn't understand your theory that well, but at least I comprehend little bits and pieces of it, shown in my responce.

    Anyway thanks for sharing your theory @Rad3k and if you want, feel free to expand upon it anytime you wish.

  7. #37
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    There is no God but God.

  8. #38
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    There is no God but God.
    "There is no god but God" would have persuaded me. Unfortunate.

  9. #39
    Senior Member tinker683's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    ISFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,662

    Default

    Atheist with Taoist leanings
    "The man who is swimming against the stream knows the strength of it."
    ― Woodrow Wilson

  10. #40
    Member Isis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7 sx/so
    Posts
    94

    Default

    monotheist
    If I weren't, I would be a wild child. It tames me. Calms me. And leaves me with only one fear- and that is the fear of God.

Similar Threads

  1. Ni Doms: What are your thoughts on God?
    By Zarathustra in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 139
    Last Post: 08-22-2012, 08:44 AM
  2. [INFJ] INFJs: What Is Your Read On This?
    By Lenian in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-02-2011, 11:34 AM
  3. Si doms, what are your thoughts on God?
    By Snuggletron in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-01-2010, 01:45 PM
  4. [SJ] SJs, what is your take on Twilight?
    By FallaciaSonata in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 09-20-2009, 07:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO