Am I an Atheist?

[Yama]

.....Maybe it's because you can sway Ti to work for any side you choose if you use it the right way, but Ne vs. Se would make it more of a social issue, where Se-using STPs support an active religious structure in society while Ne-using NTPs feel intruded upon and threatened by it.

^This. I'm no STP but because of my inferior Ti, I find myself changing opinions frequently when I learn something I didn't know before or hear an argument that is particularly convincing to me.

 

[á´…eparted]

I am not religious at all, yet I still allow myself the luxury of feeling appreciation for the natural world I am lucky enough to observe. I did not have to be conceived, but I was.

Of course. Being atheist doesn't mean you block out wonder and joy from the world.

Fair enough.

what about spiritual? Do you think someone can be non-religious and spiritual?

Yes. Spirituality and religion do not have to be linked.

 

[Luke O]

This is what I believe in:
"God" is a synonym for "the reason the world exists".
I believe there is a reason for everything, so I believe in God.
But I believe the universe has always existed, and this world is just one of many before.
Also, I believe the world was created through the laws of physics, biological evolution, and chemistry.
That's the reason why the world exists, in my opinion, so that would mean
The laws of physics are God. They are the reason we exist. They are what bind us to this planet. They are responsible for everything.
I believe in God by definition, but not in a deity.

Now to the question: Does that count as Atheism, or Deism?

If you believe that the model of existence must have required a creator god to make it, then you're not an Atheist. If you don't subscribe to a religion, you're Areligious.

My view of the term "god" is "a force we do not understand ", e.g. humanity used to believe the sun was a god (Ra) that moved around the sky on a chariot, or caused thunder (Zeus, Thor), or made it rain frogs et al (Jehovah). The more we explore how the universe actually works, and make a note of that knowledge, a god dies. But that's fine, since gods are concepts that man created anyway, ancient ways of explaining why the world and universe does what it does. I don't subscribe to this "everything happens for a reason" belief either, it was fucking me up.

 

[Poki]

It never sat well with me that the stereotypical Atheist (as opposed to mere Agnostic) is alledgedly NTP while STP is so often tied to mainstream religions. They're practically the same type.



.....Maybe it's because you can sway Ti to work for any side you choose if you use it the right way, but Ne vs. Se would make it more of a social issue, where Se-using STPs support an active religious structure in society while Ne-using NTPs feel intruded upon and threatened by it.

What in the hell are you talking about Se and STPs. As if Ti isn't an ISTPs MAIN function. Maybe you should look in the mirror about swaying Ti. Ti as a dominant function is not swayed, it is the dominant one. I have my beliefs, I believe in my beliefs, am I religious? No, I don't really like religion and believe its a part of what screws up the world. Is it gods fault, no, its man because man is very good at swaying Ti to believe what it wants. But you know what, apparently I am an atheist, who when it comes down to it has recently found that I follow the words of the bible more then most Christians. And you know what I follow? Love thy neighbor, help others, the things that revolve around caring for others. Do I worship? NO, I don't believe in worshipping anyone or anything. Do I go to church, ehhh...with others...why? because my time is best spent doing what I do. If you are raised with REAL morals not just a set of RULES all you have to do is look inside to know your path in this world. Do I need something to believe in? No, why, because my internal beliefs are so strong that I don't need to take on external beliefs from a bible. Like I said, the kicker is that as I talk to REAL christians, not just followers, the ones who actually take EVERYTHING that's said into account, not just a paraphrase here and a paraphrase there, I have more strength, more morals, and more back bone then those who go to church.

Welcome to a dominant Ti, it rules our world and all our other functions are here to support it, especially Se which SEES the real world and not just close its eyes and be forcefed by others.

Do I question whether I am atheist or not, no. Why, because in the grand scheme of things, that doesn't mean shit. I follow my morals, be nice, be courteous, be helpful, and stand your ground. And just like I have told countless others, if Worship, bow down to me, follow me blindly is what god is all about, then he can kiss my ass. I will support any religious activity that revolve around the principles of caring and kindness, those that revolve around "FEAR GOD", vengeance, etc. can go cry in some corner together singing kuumbaya or how ever the hell you spell it.

Stepping down from my pedestal and in ISTP style, walking off on my own path. Screw social structure

 

[RandomINTP]

Let me put it that way:
I said I believe in the laws of physics and that they created everything,
But why do the laws of physics work the way they do?
There has to be a reason everthing collides so perfectly...
And I believe in something that created the laws of physics, and therefore, the universe.
But I still think the universe has always existed...

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Let me put it that way:
I said I believe in the laws of physics and that they created everything,
But why do the laws of physics work the way they do?
There has to be a reason everthing collides so perfectly...
And I believe in something that created the laws of physics, and therefore, the universe.
But I still think the universe has always existed...

What you are concerned with is known as the problem of being. Why does anything exist at all? Why don't we just have nothing? Why is there anything? I found myself thinking about these things at an early age. I found it disconcerting and terrifying at first. Then I discovered that philosophers have been talking about this for a long time.

It's a question worth looking into. Anyone who tells you that it isn't has no right to label themselves a "freethinker", IMO. I adore science, but it just provides you with facts. It does not create meaning, or values. We need passion and vitality in our lives, as well as knowledge, although I think knowledge is extremely important.

 

[Luke O]

Let me put it that way:
I said I believe in the laws of physics and that they created everything,
But why do the laws of physics work the way they do?
There has to be a reason everthing collides so perfectly...
And I believe in something that created the laws of physics, and therefore, the universe.
But I still think the universe has always existed...

Why does there have to be a reason?

 

[Lark]

This is what I believe in:
"God" is a synonym for "the reason the world exists".
I believe there is a reason for everything, so I believe in God.
But I believe the universe has always existed, and this world is just one of many before.
Also, I believe the world was created through the laws of physics, biological evolution, and chemistry.
That's the reason why the world exists, in my opinion, so that would mean
The laws of physics are God. They are the reason we exist. They are what bind us to this planet. They are responsible for everything.
I believe in God by definition, but not in a deity.

Now to the question: Does that count as Atheism, or Deism?

I'm not sure its deism, it depends upon how you define it, the first Deists, the French cult of reason, well, first public, organised "church", would have professed such things.

Although it sounds like the pantheism of Spinoza or the idea of "God Hypothesis", as in the response of a scientist from the era of "enlightenment"/french revolution to the question of "what about God?" and their saying "I have no need for that hypothesis".

Its something pretty different from the personal God of theism or religion.

Its different again from the "God" of non-theistic or atheistic humanists such as Erich Fromm, which I think was in the final instance a sort of materialistic reinterpretation of Jungian ideas about archetypes and the collective unconscious.

 

[Tennessee Jed]

Let me put it that way:
I said I believe in the laws of physics and that they created everything,
But why do the laws of physics work the way they do?
There has to be a reason everthing collides so perfectly...
And I believe in something that created the laws of physics, and therefore, the universe.
But I still think the universe has always existed...

It sounds like you're just trying to equate God to the mathematical/scientific concept of "infinity." That's a literary device, not a debate point. It's like the Einstein quote in your signature: It's cute, but you can't use that quote to win an argument in a scientific debate about the nature of IQ, or about the nature of infinity. Even though it comes from Einstein.

Don't get me wrong; I liked the OP. You took some religious terms and concepts and turned them upside down and inside out. In doing so, you showed how empty and devoid of meaning those terms and concepts really are. That's fine with me.

But the OP reads like one of Mole's posts:

We know that the creator of the MBTI had no official certifications in psychology.

And we know that Carl Jung was a German.

And therefore we all know that MBTI is a cult of pedophiles and Nazis.

I don't care how many times Mole starts his sentences with the word "And"; the parts still don't add up to the whole. Same with you. I don't care how you redefine God; the parts just don't add up to the whole.

 

[RandomINTP]

It sounds like you're just trying to equate God to the mathematical/scientific concept of "infinity." That's a literary device, not a debate point. It's like the Einstein quote in your signature: It's cute, but you can't use that quote to win an argument in a scientific debate about the nature of IQ, or about the nature of infinity. Even though it comes from Einstein.

Don't get me wrong; I liked the OP. You took some religious terms and concepts and turned them upside down and inside out. In doing so, you showed how empty and void of meaning those terms and concepts really are. That's fine with me.

But the OP reads like one of Mole's posts:

We know that the creator of the MBTI had no official certifications in psychology.

And we know that Carl Jung was a German.

And therefore we all know that MBTI is a cult of pedophiles and Nazis.

I don't care how many times Mole starts his sentences with the word "And"; the parts still don't add up to the whole. Same with you. I don't care how you redefine God; the parts just don't add up to the whole.

That's the point. It doesn't add up as a whole, because I'm not sure what to believe in. When the time comes, when it makes sense, I'll make up my mind, but until then, I'll leave it open and speculate.

 

[Tennessee Jed]

That's the point. It doesn't add up as a whole, because I'm not sure what to believe in. When the time comes, when it makes sense, I'll make up my mind, but until then, I'll leave it open and speculate.

As you please. But in the meantime, you already have my answer to the OP: As long as you insist on bringing God into the picture, you're no atheist.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Its different again from the "God" of non-theistic or atheistic humanists such as Erich Fromm, which I think was in the final instance a sort of materialistic reinterpretation of Jungian ideas about archetypes and the collective unconscious.

I think Jung's stuff about sexual archetypes, like the anima and the animus, is kind of on the nose. Have you ever noticed that some men can't get past thinking of all women as saintly something I was guilty of at one point, or that some women can't get past thinking of all men as men of action trying to dominate their environment?

I guess you can't falsify any of this stuff, but if you think about it on the level of metaphors, like you would in English class, it makes sense. I had to use my intuition for that, though.

 

[GarrotTheThief]

Sure they can. I have a friend who's like that. They don't believe in a deity or anything and they're not sure about if there's an "afterlife" or not but they believe that there is something to the universe that we can never comprehend that has to do with the purpose of life (if there is one at all) and wondering why anything exists (and if nonexistence would even be possible) and stuff along that line. Well, I guess that depends on one's definition of "spiritual". Sounds spiritual to me but I guess one could also label it as "worshipping the Universe" if they wanted to.

Now I'm not even sure. Lol

I have a friend like that too actually. He migrates to California to "farm" on a collective.

 

[Avocado]

That's the point. It doesn't add up as a whole, because I'm not sure what to believe in. When the time comes, when it makes sense, I'll make up my mind, but until then, I'll leave it open and speculate.

Fair enough.

 

[Avocado]

Point is that no one knows that God doesn't exist dude.

Obviously you can choose to believe that this all came from... nothing (that makes total sense!), but it's really ignorant.
If you really want to sit there by yourself and choose not to believe in God (intruding on no one with it), then you're right in that you aren't an asshole, but guess what; it's still ignorant. People who passively doubt God are still technically agnostic.

So you're a depressive atheist. My words to you are, you don't know that there is no God/supernatural. You are being rational by withholding your faith due to lack of evidence, but my advice is to have hope, open you're mind up, and re-evaluate dude. There is evidence out there. God doesn't have to be just like what anyone says God is like. God could be like that, and he also could be nothing like that. Believing in God just means that you believe there is a force that is super natural.

The video above this sentence is an argument for why choosing one religion over another is inherently just a blind guess if your goal is metaphysical truth.

Also, there is the matter of the supernatural being, by definition, not part of nature and thus not natural. Everything we observe is natural, as in it can be explained by natural laws. Thus, anything we observe is not supernatural. That which is not observable cannot be denied or confirmed. That said, as denial is the default position for most natural scenarios until evidence is provided, because confirmation would lead to contradictions between the now conflicting scenarios, it is simpler and more logical to dismiss claims until evidence for a claim is submitted. For example, the hypothesis that a distant, unobservable planet is square cannot be true if the hypothesis that the planet is round is true.

The video below provides an illustration of my point.

In conclusion, while a supernatural force cannot be DISPROVED, without evidence, it falls into the same box as the telepathic werewalrus detailed in the video.

 

[RandomINTP]

For those who didn't understand what I meant, I KNOW I'm not an Atheist,
but I'm asking you guys, if you think my belief is Atheistic or not.
I don't believe I'm an Atheist, but I considered my belief to be that, but I wasn't sure.

 

[TheCheeseBurgerKing]

[MENTION=18694]Magic Qwan[/MENTION] Although I didn't read more than your first sentence, I completely understand that. Trust me dude.
I usually don't debate about this because, obviously, it goes no where. I was feeling really intense on the day that I originally posted in this thread. I do believe in God and supernatural, but I'm not gonna keep talking to you about it because trying to convince you isn't worth my time at all, and it probably wouldn't work.

 

[Forever_Jung]

By today's standards, no. Technically, you probably are. I guess you're a lower-case atheist.

 

[tinker683]

Your definition of "God" sounds very much like the definitions I've heard given to the Tao in the Tao De Ching