• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

INTP and hating religion.

InsatiableCuriosity

New member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
698
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5
It's probably because INTs, in general, tend to apply analytical reasoning to everything in a vicious manner that we tend to dislike church. Plus, as you said, we're not very social or generally optimistic (as in fact, we tend to be very cynical). Thus, church and the superficial smiling and false emotions which go along with it just tends to throw us off. We INTPs generally aren't made to see life from some false rosy glow; we want to know what is truly driving the world. Hence, logic tends to be used like a knife to cut away at anything and everything which doesn't add up. Therefore, we can totally reason away all of the happy aspects of life which simply ultimately lack real meaning. This may lead to nihilism, or something similar, but always something realistic and based on what logically exists. So we just tend to want to be around intelligent persons, as we are—not a bunch of rather "mindlessly social" drones who actually do tend to believe anything they are told.

At least that's how I tend to view the INTPs general relationship to society. I've been there, done that. I destroyed the concept of God, internally, through logic. I've reasoned away all of the fancy wishful thinking hopeful perceptions a human being could have toward this world (which I've come to conclude is absurd and meaningless). I've decided people are generally morons (as George Carlin did). So a church is the LAST place I ever want to be, truly wasting my time. I could masturbate, or play a few video games, instead. And life's more pleasurable and less logically dissonant that way.

You might want to visit this thread http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/bonfire/32773-righteousness-vs-being-self-righteous.html and dwell on the differences. :shock:
 

angell_m

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
818
MBTI Type
IxFx
Enneagram
5w4
Religion was of great purpose hundreds of years ago, but not anymore. Time to evolve people, chop chop. Keep religion for the sake of culture, but don't obsess it, please.
 
R

ReflecTcelfeR

Guest
Do you mind people questioning your Atheism? Or rather when/if they do what is the first thought that passes through your mind?
 

IntrovertedThinker

New member
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
96
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4

But a righteous person can come off self-righteous, if others either a) do not understand the basis on which that person feels justified in being morally correct, or b) assume that the person is completely certain of their righteousness, when in fact they aren't. Thus, one who perceives another as self-righteous may be confused, ignorant, or presumptuous. The only way to truly know if someone is self-righteous is if you can know with certainty that they absolutely believe, with wholehearted certainty, that they are correct (which in and of itself doesn't necessarily make someone self-righteous, logically speaking) and then on top of that, that they are also unjustified in their convictions, beliefs, or sense of moral superiority (or any sort of superiority).

Thus, when questioning whether someone is or is not self-righteous, we must first investigate the true basis for their sense of superiority. Are they justified or not? If they are, then they are merely righteous. If they aren't, then they are self-righteous.

Also, I've noticed a distinction between the words "arrogant" and "conceited." An arrogant person isn't always akin to a conceited person. Arrogance, in and of itself, isn't always based on a notion of personal superiority or greatness or awesomeness. Often times, arrogance stems from a notion of righteousness (or a confidence which stems from the intellectual notion that one is justified in what they hold to be true). "I'm fairly certain that I'm correct, and I don't really care what other people think." Einstein had this sort of arrogance, along with many other INTPs (and INTJs).

But this is mere intellectual confidence, when boiled down deeply, not a conceited sense of self-worth, or egoism, or narcissism (although many INTs do tend to find some level of pride in their abilities and nature). A truly conceited person feels as though they are "special." Everyone else in the world doesn't match up to them and they are worthy of respect and fame. They stare at themselves in the mirror, congratulate themselves for accomplishments, and say things like "Wow, I'm so smart." An arrogant person, on the other hand, may simply feel justified in believing themselves smarter or more moral righteous than someone else, on well-founded, intellectual grounds. A conceited person doesn't care for justification; they simply take it for granted that they are awesome people, not like anyone else.

So, I am well aware of the subtle and minute distinctions between these various words, and I'm highly independent-minded, strong-willed, and confident in any statements I make. I'm honest and direct. So, if it comes off self-righteous, I really don't care, because that's only a superficial perception, and nothing more. Most people can't back up their claims, but I'm sure you'd find it difficult proving that I've made these statements on shaky, shallow grounds. I've put much thought into this, and I therefore feel confident in my assessment of the situation. If the truth offends someone, so be it. It's not my intention, and it's not in my interest, to babysit people. If I feel that religion is this or that, or that emotional people are this or that, or that a certain actions is wrong according to a particular principle, which may offend someone who disagrees, then too bad. It's all about honesty.

If you disagree, hopefully your reasons are logically justified, because mine most likely are (as I logically scrutinize everything I think or say long in advance). So that's it. I give honest statements. I dislike dressing up the truth for anyone. To my mind, church is an awful place and the people who go there are nuts and incomprehensible, illogical freaks who often times tend to lack independence and freedom of thought (which logically explains why most of them are there in the first place, rather than somewhere else possibly expanding their minds or learning something worthwhile). And good luck persuading me otherwise. Logic doesn't sit well with a person who would attempt to argue to the contrary. Church participation is illogical. But if people wish to be illogical, that's their choice. I merely call it like I see it.

Peace.
 

IntrovertedThinker

New member
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
96
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Do you mind people questioning your Atheism? Or rather when/if they do what is the first thought that passes through your mind?

If someone questions my atheism as if I'm an alien, or some kind of hedonistic heathen who lacks moral who is going to go out and murder a bunch of people for not believing in God, as if I'm a freak who has a disease that must be treated very carefully, I am annoyed by that fact. But do I get bothered that they have asked me? No.

I'll honestly tell anyone anything they want to know. However, if their motivation for asking me is because they can't possibly understand how another person can hold different beliefs, then I'm pretty annoyed by them. So, I'll usually just answer their questions and explain why I don't believe in God. Usually, they'll react odd (because they can't logically refute my position) and will slowly move away and disengage from the conversation.

And the first thought that passes through my mind is, "Here we go again, now I have to sit here and explain why I'm different from these judgmental, narrow-minded people who assume everyone should be the same, and treat me like some ostracized freak from another country (or better yet, another planet)."

Anything else you want to know?
 

Stol11

New member
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
43
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Glad to see so many sensible agnostics/atheists/free-thinkers/humanists etc. I'm an ENTJ and you won't find a person more adverse to religion. I think the vast majority of NT's are less inclined towards religion.
 

IntrovertedThinker

New member
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
96
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
For me the true meaning of righteousness is the person who is a living example of doing the right thing but makes no claims to it.

Your definition in fact is another aspect of self-righteousness.:huh:

I think righteousness can be done or claimed. What matters if 'if' the person's actions or claims or behavior is 'justified.' If it isn't justified, then someone is self-righteous. Self-righteous means "excessively pious." Obviously, an excess of piousness is not justified, as a person merely needs to keep a moderate awareness of their righteousness (if in fact they feel justified in their righteousness).

Hence, self-righteous is more akin to "conceited" and "narcissistic." These traits aren't usually justified, but are often times due to the person's inflated sense of self, or ego. A righteous person, on the other hand, can come off arrogant, if they feel entirely confident, secure, and justified in their position. So arrogance need not necessarily mean that person isn't righteous, but more self-righteous.

Additionally, insolence isn't always a bad thing. Blatant, bold, and emphatic statements aren't always to be assumed "excessive" or "unnecessary" or "unjustified" or "false." Often times, it's merely the writer's way of expressing themselves. This can be viewed as arrogant, self-righteous, and big-headed, but all that logically matters is if the person is actually justified.

This brings us to another aspect of this entire matter. If someone is justified in feeling righteous and acts accordingly, should they? My personal opinion is that someone may express themselves however they want, if indeed they are justified. If they aren't, they make themselves look stupid, while annoying everyone else. Thus, I don't necessarily consider bold expressions and claims and statements to be necessarily offensive by default. Bold actions, claims, expressions, and statements are only offensive when they are entirely unfounded and unjustified.
 

Amethyst

¡MI TORTA!
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
2,191
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
ENTP, and personally I think it hasn't done the world a whole lot of good.
But just think what if there wasn't any? It could've been a whole lot worse, or in this case, a whole lot better:
[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5WKPpHCalY"]sdfgs[/YOUTUBE]

But then again, we could just be killing everyone for the sake of nothing, as some people just seem that they're meant to be ignorant.

I can understand the good in it though, and I'm for anyone of any religion who finds guidance in their life through it and doesn't shove it down other people's throats.

That's right, Jehovah Witnesses...just see what happens when you step on my doormat :devil:
 

IntrovertedThinker

New member
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
96
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Also, it seems some people prefer true modesty and humility. Yet, that's just not personally my style. I can tolerate modesty, but don't hold people to some ridiculous notion that they aren't ever justified or permitted to make bold claims which they feel are justified.

In other words, I don't think a lack of humility is always a bad thing, to be frowned upon. If it's justified, and if it's not done with too much dangerous excess, it then merely becomes an alternative way of expressing one's view, rather than a completely excessive notion which the person making it cannot back up.

But some people prefer humility, and good for them. It's relative, optional, and preferential. If you prefer humility, then be humble and modest, but don't expect everyone else to, and don't assume that anyone who isn't humble or modest is unjustified and self-righteous, because that's illogical. I prefer honest arrogance, and yet I don't hold it to be true that anyone who isn't honestly arrogant is somehow flawed or defective. So treat people fairly. I don't rub my honest arrogance off on you, or expect anything of you, and in return, you shouldn't expect anything of me. And in doing so, there should be tolerance for the manner in which people express themselves differently.

And here are a few great quotes to which express my position on this:

I'm not in this world to live up to your expectations and you're not in this world to live up to mine. - Bruce Lee (ISTP)

Early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and hypocritical humility. I chose the former and have seen no reason to change. - Frank Lloyd Wright (INTP)

If I'm critical towards religion in general, and religious followers themselves, then so be it. I've logical grounds on which to find these things to be faulty (as many thinker types have done in the past, e.g., John Lennon, Bertrand Russell, and Isaac Asimov). I find it all to be entirely distasteful. But do I expect you guys to suddenly drop religion and start living as I do? No. That would be foolish to push such expectations on others.

Thus, I simply provide criticism where it is warranted. Religion honestly deserves my criticism, as far as I'm concerned. But you have no reason to expect me to be more humble. Humility isn't always required or necessary, and honest arrogance is often times justified and preferred. So piss off.
 

Arthur Schopenhauer

What is, is.
Joined
May 1, 2010
Messages
1,158
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5
Give me one good reason.

I know many people that have benefited from the thing. It gave them hope in their darkest hour and a person to confide in when they were alone. One of the strongest and most respectable women I know is religious; she was in a car crash about seven years ago and she will openly admit that if it was not for god, she would have been a completely different person. Hell, my mother was about to commit suicide when I was a baby but she says that I smiled at her right before she was about to kill herself and that made her want to live and she prayed to god that day and was saved. I can name numerous incidents where religion has bettered people or families. I've experienced this firsthand many times.

Please note that I'm not saying that we should be accepting of violence or abuse... I'm only saying that we must see the goodness in the thing as there is goodness in it. It is more of an agnostic take on things, I know, but it is certainly more rational than blind hatred.
 

Rebe

New member
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
1,431
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4sop
I have never understood the appeal in religion either. It makes no logical or ethical sense to me and my fundamental principles. I have a hard time with a friend of mine who is quite deeply religious. For her, it's about ethical guidance, being connected to God and her community, believing in something more, knowing that someone will always be there for her...
 

IntrovertedThinker

New member
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
96
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Actually, I suppose "honest arrogance" can be a form of self-righteousness, but not in the derogatory sense, because self-righteousness is only truly wrong when it's unjustified or hypocritical. There is nothing inherently wrong with someone who is honestly aware of their righteousness and then makes statements accordingly. For is it an impossible notion that someone is actually aware of their own level of correctness? Not at all. Intelligent people are often times very justified in their self-awareness, in the notion that they are actually fairly correct in some particular situation.

Thus, honest arrogance and insolent demeanor isn't necessarily wrong. If it offends people, oh well. It doesn't make it wrong or unjustified, but merely socially disfavored. Yet, many INTPs don't care for social conventions, so the rest of you will just have to live with it. You enjoy the status quo and minding social conventions, some people don't. Are they criminal or rude? Not necessarily. They just don't prefer what you prefer, and there's nothing wrong with someone who doesn't favor to mind social conventions, not because they are rude or mean, but because it's just not their cup of tea.

If I am wrong about anything which I've said, then explain how, LOGICALLY. Then you can call me self-righteous and smug and arrogant and snobby all you want. But if I'm actually justified in the statements I have made, what reason do you have to attempt to look down on my demeanor, if it's simply my way of honestly expressing myself?

Knowledge in martial arts actually means self-knowledge. A martial artist has to take responsibility for himself and accept the consequences of his own doing. The understanding of JKD is through personal feeling from movement to movement in the mirror of the relationship and not through a process of isolation. To be is to be related. To isolate is death. To me, ultimately, martial arts means honestly expressing yourself. Now, it is very difficult to do. It has always been very easy for me to put on a show and be cocky, and be flooded with a cocky feeling and feel pretty cool and all that. I can make all kinds of phoney things. Blinded by it. Or I can show some really fancy movement. But to experience oneself honestly, not lying to oneself, and to express myself honestly, now that is very hard to do. - Bruce Lee

Notice the awareness of "self-knowledge." Not everyone has great self-knowledge. Not everyone is entirely confident in their abilities. But I am. I have great intrapersonal intelligence (self-knowledge). Thus, am super confident in what I believe and say, and to me it's just a matter of being honest with myself and everyone else. Hence, HONEST arrogance. If I were to dress up the truth in euphemisms and whatnot, just to make everyone else feel better, isn't my style. I have to be direct and blunt. And then I'm called self-righteous, smug, and snobby for it. Haha. How ridiculous!
 

IntrovertedThinker

New member
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
96
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
I know many people that have benefited from the thing. It gave them hope in their darkest hour and a person to confide in when they were alone. One of the strongest and most respectable women I know is religious; she was in a car crash about seven years ago and she will openly admit that if it was not for god, she would have been a completely different person. Hell, my mother was about to commit suicide when I was a baby but she says that I smiled at her right before she was about to kill herself and that made her want to live and she prayed to god that day and was saved. I can name numerous incidents where religion has bettered people or families. I've experienced this firsthand many times.

Please note that I'm not saying that we should be accepting of violence or abuse... I'm only saying that we must see the goodness in the thing as there is goodness in it. It is more of an agnostic take on things, I know, but it is certainly more rational than blind hatred.

Well, luckily for you, I wasn't really referring to people who honestly benefit from religion, on a truly spiritual level. Like Nietzsche, I understand this truth:

Faith does not offer the least support for a proof of objective truth. Here the ways of men part: if you wish to strive for peace of soul and pleasure, then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire.

I know that the truth can be hard to digest, and many people simply prefer to believe in happy thoughts. It brings consolation and is rather therapeutic. However, not everyone who attends church actually needs or requires what it offers. I'm sure many people just go because it's socially expected of them. Hence, are merely wasting their time doing something which is nothing more than mindless ritual.

Hence, if you don't attend church HONESTLY, because it's a place which brings you peace of mind, emotional consolation, and spiritual harmony, then you are the target of my criticism, because you are falling victim to a mindless social ritual which wastes your time every Sunday. And those are the mindless drones I'm talking about. People meandering around because they feel obligated to believe in God or attend Church.

Those who honestly need spiritual direction, however, I suppose are somewhat justified in doing so, because the horrors of the unknown and the fear of mortality can break any mortal being down to the core. As such, religion is a great thing to rely on (if you actually realize it's limitations). Hence, as someone else said, may we accept religion is a social part of the culture, but may we also evolve past it eventually.
 

IntrovertedThinker

New member
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
96
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
I have never understood the appeal in religion either. It makes no logical or ethical sense to me and my fundamental principles. I have a hard time with a friend of mine who is quite deeply religious. For her, it's about ethical guidance, being connected to God and her community, believing in something more, knowing that someone will always be there for her...

Yeah, I don't get that either. Your friend is the type of person I just don't understand. "Ethical guidance"? Can't people think for themselves! "Connected with God"? Because the idea brings comfort in a world of nihilistic ugliness and absurdity, or because she feels socially compelled? "Believing in something more, and for her community?" What a bunch of nonsense!

Seriously. It's one thing to believe in religion PRIVATELY, and honestly because you gain some kind of spiritual benefit from it. But those people who are just following traditional trends and doing it only because they were raised to feel obliged to believe in God and attend church are nothing more than mindless drones who can't think for themselves.
 
R

ReflecTcelfeR

Guest
If someone questions my atheism as if I'm an alien, or some kind of hedonistic heathen who lacks moral who is going to go out and murder a bunch of people for not believing in God, as if I'm a freak who has a disease that must be treated very carefully, I am annoyed by that fact. But do I get bothered that they have asked me? No.

I'll honestly tell anyone anything they want to know. However, if their motivation for asking me is because they can't possibly understand how another person can hold different beliefs, then I'm pretty annoyed by them. So, I'll usually just answer their questions and explain why I don't believe in God. Usually, they'll react odd (because they can't logically refute my position) and will slowly move away and disengage from the conversation.

And the first thought that passes through my mind is, "Here we go again, now I have to sit here and explain why I'm different from these judgmental, narrow-minded people who assume everyone should be the same, and treat me like some ostracized freak from another country (or better yet, another planet)."

Anything else you want to know?

Do you think that the bible/religious texts have any plausibility literally or figuratively?
 
Top