Your initial thoughts about 3 common religious 'belief' terms

Your initial thoughts about 3 common religious 'belief' terms

Spirituality

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

A
The 'edit'or

converging to it

Joined
21 Aug 06
Moves
11479
23 Jun 10
4 edits

Firstly I realise that many of you have somewhat refined notions about what sort of person is a [insert type of person], so I ask more what is your "shot from the hip" response to the terms that will follow (or let's say what *would* have been your "shot from the hip" prior to the insight you may now have?)

1) atheist
2) agnostic
3) theist


mine would be 1) has lack of belief in gods, 2) has belief that the existence of some god is a 50-50 proposition either way, impossible to know, 3) has belief in a particular god, represented accurately by a particular holy book, all other holy books are false.

ZellulÀrer Automat

Spiel des Lebens

Joined
27 Jan 05
Moves
90892
23 Jun 10
3 edits

Originally posted by Agerg
Firstly I realise that many of you have somewhat refined notions about what sort of person is a [insert type of person], so I ask more what is your "shot from the hip" response to the terms that will follow (or let's say what *would* have been your "shot from the hip" prior to the insight you may now have?)

1) atheist
2) agnostic
3) theist


mine ...[text shortened]... r way, impossible to know, 3) has belief in some particular god inspired by some holy book.
Mine would be the same as yours, minus the holy books (not always necessary) and the exclusivity. OK, maybe I have to define after all: atheist: one for whom divinity is meaningless; agnostic: one who cannot rule out the possible influence of some divine power; theist: one for whom existence is predicated on divinity (I sharply disagree about the need for exclusivity, though).

But is an animist a theist? Isn't an agnostic a skeptic with a smiley face? Could a person raised in pure ignorance of the concepts 'deity' or 'divinity' be properly said to be an atheist? The words are all historically charged and limited.

w

Joined
02 Jan 06
Moves
12857
23 Jun 10

Originally posted by Agerg
Firstly I realise that many of you have somewhat refined notions about what sort of person is a [insert type of person], so I ask more what is your "shot from the hip" response to the terms that will follow (or let's say what *would* have been your "shot from the hip" prior to the insight you may now have?)

1) atheist
2) agnostic
3) theist


mine ...[text shortened]... in a particular god as represented a particular holy book, all other holy books are false.
1) Self diluded'
2) Misguided
3) Spot on!! 😀

A
The 'edit'or

converging to it

Joined
21 Aug 06
Moves
11479
23 Jun 10
2 edits

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Mine would be the same as yours, minus the holy books (not always necessary) and the exclusivity. OK, maybe I have to define after all: atheist: one for whom divinity is meaningless; agnostic: one who cannot rule out the possible influence of some divine power; theist: one for whom existence is predicated on divinity (I sharply disagree about the need ity' be properly said to be an atheist? The words are all historically charged and limited.
Yeah, the exclusivity thing I edited in was in the interests of playing fair; I don't necessarily hold that belief now but my very first stereotype of a theist would have been that.

As you've probably gathered I am interested in the stereotypes automatically assigned to people who state one of those 3 positions

F

Unknown Territories

Joined
05 Dec 05
Moves
20408
23 Jun 10

Originally posted by Agerg
Firstly I realise that many of you have somewhat refined notions about what sort of person is a [insert type of person], so I ask more what is your "shot from the hip" response to the terms that will follow (or let's say what *would* have been your "shot from the hip" prior to the insight you may now have?)

1) atheist
2) agnostic
3) theist


mine wou ...[text shortened]... ular god, represented accurately by a particular holy book, all other holy books are false.[/b]
1) atheist Self-contradictory, blinded by own small light.

2) agnostic Places hope in ambiguity: perhaps by sitting on the fence, lack of commitment won't be noticed.

3) theist On the right track, possibly.

ZellulÀrer Automat

Spiel des Lebens

Joined
27 Jan 05
Moves
90892
23 Jun 10

Originally posted by Agerg
Yeah, the exclusivity thing I edited in was in the interests of playing fair; I don't necessarily hold that belief now but my very first stereotype of a theist would have been that.

As you've probably gathered I am interested in the stereotypes automatically assigned to people who state one of those 3 positions
Yes. I have given you the 'first thoughts' I had about those things.

F

Unknown Territories

Joined
05 Dec 05
Moves
20408
23 Jun 10

Mildly amusing, however, is your use of the words "religious" and "belief." When I've attached the labels to atheism in the past, my submission is met with all manner of rejection, vitriol.

A
The 'edit'or

converging to it

Joined
21 Aug 06
Moves
11479
23 Jun 10
2 edits

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Mildly amusing, however, is your use of the words "religious" and "belief." When I've attached the labels to atheism in the past, my submission is met with all manner of rejection, vitriol.
Hmm...if I am to take that as contradicting myself (or someone else by proxy) in other discussions by virtue of how I titled this thread or the contents of my OP I would ask how!?

Or perhaps you're referring to the fact I used 'belief' as opposed to belief :]

F

Unknown Territories

Joined
05 Dec 05
Moves
20408
23 Jun 10

Originally posted by Agerg
Hmm...if I am to take that as contradicting myself (or someone else by proxy) in other discussions by virtue of how I titled this thread or the contents of my OP I would ask how!?

Or perhaps you're referring to the fact I used 'belief' as opposed to belief :]
The problem others have had with atheism/agnosticism being labeled as 'beliefs' or 'religions' is quite convoluted. So much so, that I am unable to bear the twisting logic of it without getting a mild headache. There was even one poor chap so contorted in his defense, he resorted to insisting they weren't positions, either! Hard to keep it all straight, I say.

P
Upward Spiral

Halfway

Joined
02 Aug 04
Moves
8702
23 Jun 10

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Isn't an agnostic a skeptic with a smiley face?
An agnostic is a skeptic without an opinion. đŸ˜”

A
The 'edit'or

converging to it

Joined
21 Aug 06
Moves
11479
23 Jun 10
2 edits

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The problem others have had with atheism/agnosticism being labeled as 'beliefs' or 'religions' is quite convoluted. So much so, that I am unable to bear the twisting logic of it without getting a mild headache. There was even one poor chap so contorted in his defense, he resorted to insisting they weren't positions, either! Hard to keep it all straight, I say.
As far as atheism being labeled as a belief, that is one of the motivations for this thread! (ie: how prevalent is the view that atheism *is* a belief (in particular, the belief there are no gods)?) This statement I can forgive (though certainly not agree with), but "religion"??? How does atheism qualify as such?

F

Unknown Territories

Joined
05 Dec 05
Moves
20408
23 Jun 10

Originally posted by Agerg
As far as atheism being labeled as a belief, that is one of the motivations for this thread! (ie: how prevalent is the view that atheism *is* a belief (in particular, the belief there are no gods)?) This statement I can forgive (though certainly not agree with), but "religion"??? How does atheism qualify as such?
Although the term 'religion' has taken on a decidedly emotional/sentimental overture of late, the underlying concept behind the term is to denote a careful (as opposed to negligent) monastic existence, bound fast to solitary, self-inspective--- self-concerned or even self-absorbed--- vows.

A
The 'edit'or

converging to it

Joined
21 Aug 06
Moves
11479
23 Jun 10
3 edits

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Although the term 'religion' has taken on a decidedly emotional/sentimental overture of late, the underlying concept behind the term is to denote a careful (as opposed to negligent) monastic existence, bound fast to solitary, self-inspective--- self-concerned or even self-absorbed--- vows.
Is it? whether or not atheism satisfies the criterion(s) for being a (or for having the qualities of a) religion under this given definition (I'm not seeing how), I'm not an etymologist so I reference the first main paragraph in the wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion) for "religion":

Religion (from Latin religio, "reverence for the gods", "piety", possibly related to religare, "to bind"[1]) is the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or more in general a set of beliefs explaining the existence of and giving meaning to the universe, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.[2]

Surely you can see why there is a justifiable tendency to attach some notion of an existent god(s) to the term "religion", and so given (I assert) a wealth of commonly agreed convention on what this word minimally entails I'm still troubled as to how it fits atheism

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
23 Jun 10

Originally posted by Agerg
what is your "shot from the hip" response to the terms that will follow
Are we talking about our response to the terms themselves, or to people claiming to be one of them?
If someone says they are agnostic I tend to think that either:
1. They are actually atheists who don't feel comfortable with admitting it - due to discrimination against atheists.
or
2. They genuinely think it is a reasonable position.

A
The 'edit'or

converging to it

Joined
21 Aug 06
Moves
11479
23 Jun 10
4 edits

Originally posted by twhitehead
Are we talking about our response to the terms themselves, or to people claiming to be one of them?
If someone says they are agnostic I tend to think that either:
1. They are actually atheists who don't feel comfortable with admitting it - due to discrimination against atheists.
or
2. They genuinely think it is a reasonable position.
I'd say I'm talking more about the actual terms themselves, and the stereotypes attributed to people aligned with them. The reason I want a gut reaction is because often in discourse a particular way of thinking, regardless of the circumstances is, I assert subconciously assigned to people who hold them.

It is a conjecture of mine that there is in many cases, a (biased) trinary way of thinking about ones position towards the existence of gods
1) One believes 100% that there exists no god or gods
2) One believes there may or may not be a god, equal probability either way
3) One is either 100% sure or highly confident there is a god, (though not necessarily 100% sure (hence having faith))
No other positions being allowed!