[NT] NTs, would you marry a Theist?

[Caesar]

I would, on certain conditions:

• They must be open minded and tolerate that I have a different opinion, and not attempt to force theirs on me.
• Any children we have shall be raised secularly. I won't insist that they become atheists, but there will be no preaching. Children will learn about religion without being taught religion.
• That said, should the children want to become theists, that's fine.
• Their religious principles must not violate my fundamental moral principles. Such as, there will be no genital mutilation of my children. Daughters shall not wear burqa. They will not attend religiously sponsored schools. They cannot sponsor extremism and must thoroughly denounce violence towards adherents of other religions and of the irreligious.
• I will eat pork, beef, keep a dog and will not adhere to their taboos and on most occasions, shall not go to churches, synagogues or mosques.

 

[EcK]

Yeah, same here (agnostic)...

Still, I would actually prefer to marry a (theologically liberal) theist, mostly because I think its good for kids to believe in free will, eternity, and all that jazz, and I would be unable to provide that perspective for them. Why depress them during their impressionable years?

I never really understood what was so depressing about non theistic views. It's just realistic, but the universe is more of a cool place without some non sensical father figure in it to me.

 

[Xenon]

I never really understood what was so depressing about non theistic views. It's just realistic, but the universe is more of a cool place without some non sensical father figure in it to me.

I agree; it doesn't have to be depressing. Based on other internet discussions with atheists and agnostics, it seems people who were raised to believe in a God and then lose this belief have a much harder time than people who were never taught to believe it in the first place. A number of atheists who were raised in non-religious homes say they're puzzled at how attached people are to their beliefs.

In answer to the original question, it's hard to say. A lot of people in the "would you marry an atheist" thread said it depends, and theists vary even more than atheists do. I could see myself with someone who had some vague 'there's something out there' beliefs, or who has grown up in an organized religion and maintains some loose ties with it. If religion is a large part of their lives and identity and informs a lot of their views, that would likely be a problem. I'll say yes, because it's possible, and I prefer to get to know a person first.

 

[lowtech redneck]

I never really understood what was so depressing about non theistic views.

Hey, kid, Grandma's dead and you will never see her again! Also, you'll never be able to know what happens 150 years from now, nor have time to really enjoy exploring everything that interests you! Isn't it so exciting knowing you are an organic automaton without free will? Isn't all of this so totally non-depressing and cool!?

uh, no.

 

[Caesar]

Hey, kid, Grandma's dead and you will never see her again! Also, you'll never be able to know what happens 150 years from now, nor have time to really enjoy exploring everything that interests you! Isn't it so exciting knowing you are an organic automaton without free will? Isn't all of this so totally non-depressing and cool!?

uh, no.

Really. I find it comforting actually that some relationships end- forever. Perhaps I was callous as a child, but I was the only one not crying at my grandmother's (who practically raised me) funeral. I was seven and mother asked me: "why weren't you crying"? According to her, I said matter-of-factly "it's a part of life, so crying isn't going to bring her back". I don't see non-theistic viewpoints as depressing at all. I accept it and live all the more happily for it because this is my one shot at life.

 

[lowtech redneck]

I don't see non-theistic viewpoints as depressing at all. I accept it and live all the more happily for it because this is my one shot at life.

Yea, I've heard all of this before, and I don't get it at all. I can understand becoming inured to lack of hope and limited options, but viewing such as an existential bonus seems patently absurd to me, like someone preferring to work 16 hours a day for starvation wages instead of 8 hours a day with good pay, all because the contrast makes a can of beer or an overheard song seem that much better in comparison.

 

[Beargryllz]

Hey, kid, Grandma's dead and you will never see her again! Also, you'll never be able to know what happens 150 years from now, nor have time to really enjoy exploring everything that interests you! Isn't it so exciting knowing you are an organic automaton without free will? Isn't all of this so totally non-depressing and cool!?

uh, no.

None of this is depressing. This is reality. Living under a false reality is, on the other hand, not only incredibly depressing, but immoral to impose onto others.

 

[lowtech redneck]

None of this is depressing. This is reality.

Living under a false reality is, on the other hand, not only incredibly depressing, but immoral to impose onto others.

Do we really need to go into the is/ought fallacy? Reality, at least as far as science indicates, is depressing.


As we have established (if nothing else), what is utilitarian and what is not is an inherently subjective matter. In a nihilistic universe, 'truth' or 'reality' has no worth beyond its utilitarian value; we disagree on what provides optimal utilitarian benefit for most people. I think its cruel, if not immoral, to provide an upbringing for children that will have highly sup-optimal utilitarian results for the typical person.

 

[Beargryllz]

Do we really need to go into the is/ought fallacy? Reality, at least as far as science indicates, is depressing.

Is it?

 

[lowtech redneck]

According to my subjective opinion, yes. According to your subjective opinion, it is not.

 

[Beargryllz]

It isn't just that it isn't depressing, it is beautiful

 

[Mephistopheles]

As we have established (if nothing else), what is utilitarian and what is not is an inherently subjective matter. In a nihilistic universe, 'truth' or 'reality' has no worth beyond its utilitarian value

Sry, but afaik you're the one providing the logical fallacy here; As a nihilist, nothing has a worth per definition - also the "utilitarian value", not even life itself.
You merely can set yourself goals which provide worth; For me, the goal is understanding, so the so-called "truth" gets a worth. For you - at least, it seems so -, the goal is functioning, so your "utilitarian value" gets it's worth.

 

[ZPowers]

I'd marry a theist, I suppose, if they weren't too overzealous about their faith. Though honestly my ideal partner would probably be a non-theist.

 

[ZPowers]

It isn't just that it isn't depressing, it is beautiful

Well, it's really a little of column A and a little of column B, and the two are definitely connected.

 

[lowtech redneck]

It isn't just that it isn't depressing, it is beautiful

See post #106; we just have different conceptions of 'beauty'.

 

[lowtech redneck]

For me, the goal is understanding, so the so-called "truth" gets a worth.

And that pursuit of 'truth' and understanding is what provides your utility; existentialism is essentially a coping mechanism through which people seek to maximize their personal utility in a nihilistic universe, not a description of the universe itself.

 

[You]

Since I am agnostic, I couldn't deal with a devout theist/religious member. There is no way of getting around this. The expectations of the relationship would eventually strain the bond, and one of us would be more dissatisified in the compromise. Often times relation's compromise may leave both parties dissatisified. The degree in a paticular parties discontent will breed bitterness, and/or distance between said person. In the end, we're having arguements about the food a child may, or can not eat in the kitchen at 3 o'clock in the morning. Religion is obviously a hot topic, and to overlook that cultural influence in a relationship is ignorant.

 

[Mephistopheles]

And that pursuit of 'truth' and understanding is what provides your utility; existentialism is essentially a coping mechanism through which people seek to maximize their personal utility in a nihilistic universe, not a description of the universe itself.

That's a claim without foundation. Not everyone's ultimate goal is it to "maximize their personal utility".

 

[Nicodemus]

That's a claim without foundation. Not everyone's ultimate goal is it to "maximize their personal utility".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism#Concepts

 

[lowtech redneck]

That's a claim without foundation. Not everyone's ultimate goal is it to "maximize their personal utility".

Outside of faith-based declarations, yes they do. What provides pleasure/pain differs in causation and intensity from person to person, but the overall goal is utility. Remember our lack of free will? The pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain is the cause/effect of our mental programming.

I have no problem if you wish to hope otherwise-I certainly do.