[Other] NFs, would you marry an atheist?

[EcK]

How so?

*sigh*
Do you really want a list ?
There is such a thing as double standards.

 

[Santosha]

*sigh*
Do you really want a list ?
There is such a thing as double standards.

Yes, I think when you call someone narrow you shoud support why.. like i did in my post =)

 

[Thalassa]

I couldn't tolerate an atheist.
To be an agnostic, and say you don't have enough proof one way or the other is fair, and probably true.. but to be an atheist, and believe that nothing COULD exist outside of logic is so ridiculously narrow that I don't think I could bare being with someone like this. To deny the possibility of an intelligent design when all the wonders of the world surround you day after day.. to turn your head to amazing break throughs like 'memory outside of consciousness' and studies that highly accredited neurosurgeons and cardiologist are doing in near death research institutes.. I just don't think I could tolerate somone like that. They'd rank somewhere in between ron hubbard and the easter bunny to me.

Now there are a few reasons someone might identify as an atheist that I could forgive..

They are very intelligent but young.. have lots of books to back it up but don't have much life experience to draw on.. they will eventually change there mind (like when there 75 and diagnosed with colon cancer)

THey are too lazy to really research and study it for themselves, so they follow the foot steps of other so-called "intellectuals" to place themself on an some kind of intellectual high ground without realzing how fake and psuedo intellectual it is..

They are so over run with logic, empirical evidence, etc. that there is almost a disconnect between logic and truth. To believe that logic is all there is.. and that current human logic is as good as it gets.. is absurd. Logic is a tool and like any tool it can be mis used (aristotle) so if your basing your drastic sweeping assuption that no good exits based on logic, your a fool, imo. =)

Now, I've known a few die hard atheists that did not fit into these categories. Dated one of them. And when I got at the real nectar behind these thought processes of his.. I was not only shocked & overwhelmed with such darkness, but felt absolutely terrible for him. The existential crises he had, the lack of faith in fellow human beings, the inability to see anything as meaningful or magical, it was just.. horrific. I say this because you would have to understand how these deeply rooted thoughts surfaced for him in everyday life. He had a complete disconnect with spiritual consciousness. Felt mroe alone that anyone I've ever known. And i'd say this is the one type of atheist I could NEVER be with. The one that would rob me of ever sharing all the majic beautiful connections that life has with him. The one that couldn't hold our first child in his arms the day it was born and KNOW it had a soul. I mean, fuck that.

Just sayen. =)

You know there are different kinds of atheists, right? There are the American Atheists preachy crazy ones that go around zealously trying to belittle and convert others kind of like a mirror of their Fundamentalist Christian counterparts (and I'm guessing if they didn't feel so strongly about atheism they'd be straight-edge punks or PETA-style vegans or something who also aggressively pushed their beliefs on others)...and nah, want nothing to do with that.

But like I just mentioned in another thread, some atheists are Buddhists, you don't have to believe in god to be spiritual, and that's a hard concept for some people to grasp.

My ex is an atheist but he believes in good and evil, and believes children have a soul when they're born...but only after they're born, not in utero, he believes the soul is an essence that builds within a person from life experience.

 

[Santosha]

You know there are different kinds of atheists, right? There are the American Atheists preachy crazy ones that go around zealously trying to belittle and convert others kind of like a mirror of their Fundamentalist Christian counterparts (and I'm guessing if they didn't feel so strongly about atheism they'd be straight-edge punks or PETA-style vegans or something who also aggressively pushed their beliefs on others)...and nah, want nothing to do with that.

But like I just mentioned in another thread, some atheists are Buddhists, you don't have to believe in god to be spiritual, and that's a hard concept for some people to grasp.

My ex is an atheist but he believes in good and evil, and believes children have a soul when they're born...but only after they're born, not in utero, he believes the soul is an essence that builds within a person from life experience.

I was going by text book "specifically the the position that there are no deities"

 

[Stanton Moore]

If I believed in her, it wouldn't matter to me. I'm more troubled by religious certainty.

 

[EcK]

Yes, I think when you call someone narrow you shoud support why.. like i did in my post =)

k

 

[Thalassa]

I was going by text book "specifically the the position that there are no deities"

Yeah, and there are spiritual atheists who believe there are no deities.

There are also compassionate, ethical atheists who don't prescribe to any religion or spirituality, who aren't as dark and whatever you were trying to describe with your ex-bf.

You make atheism sound as though it automatically equals some hard-hearted person mired in existential angst.

 

[EcK]

I couldn't tolerate an atheist.
To be an agnostic, and say you don't have enough proof one way or the other is fair, and probably true.. but to be an atheist, and believe that nothing COULD exist outside of logic is so ridiculously narrow that I don't think I could bare being with someone like this. To deny the possibility of an intelligent design when all the wonders of the world surround you day after day.. to turn your head to amazing break throughs like 'memory outside of consciousness' and studies that highly accredited neurosurgeons and cardiologist are doing in near death research institutes.. I just don't think I could tolerate somone like that. They'd rank somewhere in between ron hubbard and the easter bunny to me.

The green bit: I absolutly agree. I believe most actually smart atheists do it more in reaction to\to create a counterweight to the positive claims of religion. In terms of PR if someone claims A and the other doesn't claim anything people will have a tendency to believe A by default.

the brown bit: while I agree that all data has to be considered I think you probably select the bits you want to believe in. So far noone of these studies have any kind of results they were able to reproduce and contain so much procedural misteps biasing the data that it isn't even funny. There's one interesting experiment about esp done recently but it hasn't been reproduced yet though. here's a link, enjoy

Also if you claim that studies are made looking into the 'paranormal' (i disagree with this terminology as all that is observed is part of the natural world, otherwise we wouldnt be able to observe it) and use it to point at the narrow mindedness of other people, how can you then claim that relying on logic and empirical data is suddently not the method to go by

Now there are a few reasons someone might identify as an atheist that I could forgive..

You're not a judge and atheism isn't illegal

They are very intelligent but young.. have lots of books to back it up but don't have much life experience to draw on.. they will eventually change there mind (like when there 75 and diagnosed with colon cancer)

That's no more correlated with atheism than being an idiot is correlated with being human. Significant but not particularily so once you normalize the data with the witness sample. (I.E. People in general)
I think that vision of the 'reedeeming atheist' is probably more of an urban legend than anything else by the way. I always hear religious types talk about it but I have yet to see it happen or see any data backing it up. If anyone has any study on the topic it'd be cool.

THey are too lazy to really research and study it for themselves, so they follow the foot steps of other so-called "intellectuals" to place themself on an some kind of intellectual high ground without realzing how fake and psuedo intellectual it is..

Yes, that's how I meant by double standards. Check the methodology of the studies you refer to before saying things like this please.

They are so over run with logic, empirical evidence, etc. that there is almost a disconnect between logic and truth.

So, basically based on this I could claim anything as being true with no evidence. Unicorns and the Sauron and rings of power. Empirical evidence is something we use because it's testable and reliable. You don't believe in fairy tales BECAUSE of empirical evidence (i hope) so why does religion makes exception to that rule?

Logic is a tool and like any tool it can be mis used (aristotle) so if your basing your drastic sweeping assuption that no good exits based on logic, your a fool, imo. =)

And what is your alternative by the way?
You need a kind of frame to think. Also People aren't absolutly rational, there's nothing rational about empathy for example, it's just a fact of human nature. But as a fact it can be assessed logically. It's not perfect but it works better than unreliable methods based exclusively on internalized states that translate badly in language. And if you can't communicate something you can't reliably test it. That's all well and good if you're talking about someone feeling happy, not if its about something with clear consequences for the 'outside' universe, such as the existence or not of unicorns, gods or ghosts.

I was not only shocked & overwhelmed with such darkness, but felt absolutely terrible for him. The existential crises he had, the lack of faith in fellow human beings, the inability to see anything as meaningful or magical, it was just.. horrific.

Yes, I don't know the guy, but generally the 'void' etc people talk about when talking about the absence of the belief in a god is something that only seem to bother atheist in the imagination of theists. I'm sure there are exception but anecdotal evidence is no proof.

The one that would rob me of ever sharing all the majic beautiful connections that life has with him. The one that couldn't hold our first child in his arms the day it was born and KNOW it had a soul. I mean, fuck that.

Yes, again, there is absolutly no more data to back that up than there is to back up fairies, and I'll remind you that you seemed to welcome empirical evidence when it fits your views, that's not reason but selective delusion.
While this doesn't make your claim untrue it makes them into one possibility among at least 10 to the power of a hundred (far more than there is atoms in the universe) and then some with absolutly no reason to prefer your theory than there is to believe in any other fancy of the imagination. And that sort of claim to me take such utter disregard for other people or even bothering to back up one's view that it dwarves the narrow mindedness of hardcore atheists.

 

[Santosha]

Let me clarify.. The Atheist I was referring to is the atheist that believes NOTHING exists after death. Nothing. Not god, heaven, diety, energy change. You cease to exist in any form.

 

[EcK]

Let me clarify.. The Atheist I was referring to is the atheist that believes NOTHING exists after death. Nothing. Not god, heaven, diety, energy change. You cease to exist in any form.

ANd you claim that something happens after one's death based on absolutly no evidence of any kind, selectively discard empirical evidence and logic and then use empirical evidence in a counter example, offer absolutly no other alternatives than your own unjustified beliefs and complete disregard for other people's viewpoint and yet call an atheist who at least has some kind of data to back their claims up as narrow minded only succeeding in showing how much, much more narrow minded and arrogant you are

 

[Santosha]

The green bit: I absolutly agree. I believe most actually smart atheists do it more in reaction to\to create a counterweight to the positive claims of religion. In terms of PR if someone claims A and the other doesn't claim anything people will have a tendency to believe A by default.

the brown bit: while I agree that all data has to be considered I think you probably select the bits you want to believe in. So far noone of these studies have any kind of results they were able to reproduce and contain so much procedural misteps biasing the data that it isn't even funny. There's one interesting experiment about esp done recently but it hasn't been reproduced yet though. here's a link, enjoy

Also if you claim that studies are made looking into the 'paranormal' (i disagree with this terminology as all that is observed is part of the natural world, otherwise we wouldnt be able to observe it) and use it to point at the narrow mindedness of other people, how can you then claim that relying on logic and empirical data is suddently not the method to go by


You're not a judge and atheism isn't illegal


That's no more correlated with atheism than being an idiot is correlated with being human. Significant but not particularily so once you normalize the data with the witness sample. (I.E. People in general)
I think that vision of the 'reedeeming atheist' is probably more of an urban legend than anything else by the way. I always hear religious types talk about it but I have yet to see it happen or see any data backing it up. If anyone has any study on the topic it'd be cool.


Yes, that's how I meant by double standards. Check the methodology of the studies you refer to before saying things like this please.


So, basically based on this I could claim anything as being true with no evidence. Unicorns and the Sauron and rings of power. Empirical evidence is something we use because it's testable and reliable. You don't believe in fairy tales BECAUSE of empirical evidence (i hope) so why does religion makes exception to that rule?


And what is your alternative by the way?
You need a kind of frame to think. Also People aren't absolutly rational, there's nothing rational about empathy for example, it's just a fact of human nature. But as a fact it can be assessed logically. It's not perfect but it works better than unreliable methods based exclusively on internalized states that translate badly in language. And if you can't communicate something you can't reliably test it. That's all well and good if you're talking about someone feeling happy, not if its about something with clear consequences for the 'outside' universe, such as the existence or not of unicorns, gods or ghosts.


Yes, I don't know the guy, but generally the 'void' etc people talk about when talking about the absence of the belief in a god is something that only seem to bother atheist in the imagination of theists. I'm sure there are exception but anecdotal evidence is no proof.


Yes, again, there is absolutly no more data to back that up than there is to back up fairies, and I'll remind you that you seemed to welcome empirical evidence when it fits your views, that's not reason but selective delusion.
While this doesn't make your claim untrue it makes them into one possibility among at least 10 to the power of a hundred (far more than there is atoms in the universe) and then some with absolutly no reason to prefer your theory than there is to believe in any other fancy of the imagination. And that sort of claim to me take such utter disregard for other people or even bothering to back up one's view that it dwarves the narrow mindedness of hardcore atheists.

Let me get back to you on this Eck. I'm heading to get a cold, wet, sparkley diet rockstar. I think some of what I've said has been taken out of context. Responce coming =)

 

[Santosha]

ANd you claim that something happens after one's death based on absolutly no evidence of any kind, selectively discard empirical evidence and logic and then use empirical evidence in a counter example, offer absolutly no other alternatives than your own unjustified beliefs and complete disregard for other people's viewpoint and yet call an atheist who at least has some kind of data to back their claims up as narrow minded only succeeding in showing how much, much more narrow minded and arrogant you are

No. I don't claim anything is coming. I'm agnostic, and think everyone probably is. I believe the atheists are as bad as the theists.. taking a stance on something unknown. Atleast the agnostics KNOW they dont KNOW.

 

[cascadeco]

Let me clarify.. The Atheist I was referring to is the atheist that believes NOTHING exists after death. Nothing. Not god, heaven, diety, energy change. You cease to exist in any form.

Ok, there are people who think that. What are you trying to clarify?

Actually I think that's quite possible. But I'm not in a position to KNOW that, nor am I in a position to know something else will happen. I have quite a number of reasons why I would reject a few of those notions. though.

I often think though that most people are spiritual or religious due to this topic alone - the discomfort that there might actually not be anything post-death.

Also, tying to some of Marm's comments, I can say I'm very much at peace and voidless as an agnostic/atheist. And a sidenote - I am also probably the biggest nature-lover/appreciator ever. I find the world/universe beautiful and amazing.

 

[skylights]

an agnostic atheist, sure - i think it would be a little more difficult to sustain a relationship with a "certain" atheist. i tend to dislike dogma of any variety.

i'm lightly spiritual / agnostic myself, no major convictions besides assuming the existence of something bigger than us, whatever form that may come in. i've been happy in relationships with a liberal protestant christian, an agnostic, and an agnostic atheist-by-belief, jew-by-culture.

I even went to Unitarian Universalist, and they seemed a little bit too militant to me...too intolerant...too argumentative. I'm hoping that the one service I attended what not representative. At least they weren't adamant in the God or no-God area, however.

oh, yuck. i attended a great UU church for a while. they were really chill and open. sorry you had a bad experience with it

 

[Virulence]

I'm agnostic with a pretty strong sense of spirituality.

An atheist who was insistent on shoving "THERE IS NO GOD AND YOU'RE DUMB IF YOU THINK THERE IS" down people's throats? No.

An atheist more with an attitude of, "I don't believe in a higher power or have an interest in organized religion at all, but I don't really care if anyone else does," yes.

It's more related to wanting to be with someone who respects others and doesn't treat them poorly for silly reasons than taking any issue with atheism, though.

 

[Elfboy]

Any religion?

any religion (or more importantly, any branch of a religion) that has some sort of strong core values. naturally, my biased response is to say that christianity teaches the best values, but there are other religions out there who teach perfectly good values and I believe they're better off without parents who have some sort of spiritual structure if you will. perhaps that's the mini ISTJ in me coming out

 

[011235813]

I would marry someone who respected my right to my own opinions just as I respected his. I'm fine with anyone who doesn't try to force his beliefs, whether atheist or religious, down my throat.

That said, it would be easier for me to marry a militant atheist than a religious dogmatist, primarily because God doesn't feature heavily in my personal set of beliefs (although I believe in the existence of God more than not.)

 

[Nicodemus]

any religion (or more importantly, any branch of a religion) that has some sort of strong core values. naturally, my biased response is to say that christianity teaches the best values, but there are other religions out there who teach perfectly good values and I believe they're better off without parents who have some sort of spiritual structure if you will. perhaps that's the mini ISTJ in me coming out

Are there elements beside core values that make religions important?

 

[syndatha]

Are there elements beside core values that make religions important?

How you perceive the world, for instance

 

[ReadingRainbows]

I'm a theist, I'd marry another theist. I have no preferences of christian or not. But belief in god is important.