"I don't believe in any gods, but I'm not an atheist..."

[kanako irigashi]

Are we talking about someone who is really Agnostic?

[Sugar Frosted Steel]

The Legendary Guest

Infamy In Action

Obviously the post is here to be public and talked about. But when you ask "What do you want to discuss?" As though the post itself and whatever any commenter adds isn't the obvious thing to discuss, there's nothing else to talk about.

Is there something wrong with seeking clarity then, to your way of thinking?

Quote:

Like you just did.

Did what? Ask for clarity? Ask for the OP to define the topic instead of trying to glean one from a rant, which may be incorrect?

Quote:

Like I said, If someone wants to add an idea to it, which you clearly did, I would discuss it. So again, why would it be an opinion?

Quote:

What "idea" are you under the impression I am adding here?

Quote:

Also, none of what I said should've come off as a threat to you.

Interesting comment to make, considering I didn't take it that way.

Quote:

There's no reason to be so on the offensive. yum_cupcake

Also interesting that you take me as being "on the offensive". Why is that?

No. Of course not. Sorry, I tried my best not to come off as snarky.(I edited my post 3 times as I misread your post and probably the tone in it.) I was sincerely answering, nothing unless someone wants to add or argue.

That my statement of the lack of belief in a god being atheism is an opinion.

Your second post however read as snarky to me, though and I'm sure it was. But my original comment to you was not meant to incite such a reaction. It came off to me as if I came off to you with a different tone.

[Sugar Frosted Steel]

kanako irigashi

Are we talking about someone who is really Agnostic?

What do you mean? sweatdrop

[The Legendary Guest]

Infamy In Action

The Legendary Guest

Infamy In Action

Obviously the post is here to be public and talked about. But when you ask "What do you want to discuss?" As though the post itself and whatever any commenter adds isn't the obvious thing to discuss, there's nothing else to talk about.

Is there something wrong with seeking clarity then, to your way of thinking?

Quote:

Like you just did.

Did what? Ask for clarity? Ask for the OP to define the topic instead of trying to glean one from a rant, which may be incorrect?

Quote:

Like I said, If someone wants to add an idea to it, which you clearly did, I would discuss it. So again, why would it be an opinion?

Quote:

What "idea" are you under the impression I am adding here?

Quote:

Also, none of what I said should've come off as a threat to you.

Interesting comment to make, considering I didn't take it that way.

Quote:

There's no reason to be so on the offensive. yum_cupcake

Also interesting that you take me as being "on the offensive". Why is that?

No. Of course not.

Glad we cleared that up, because I am a real stickler for clarification. wink

Quote:

Sorry, I tried my best not to come off as snarky.(I edited my post 3 times as I misread your post and probably the tone in it.) I was sincerely answering, nothing unless someone wants to add or argue.

I see how that could come about. I did mean that sincerely when I asked what you'd like to discuss but I did not go back and see your editing, and I am inclined to take things that are not expressly ED material very poorly due to the overwhelming number of trolls we get in here.

Quote:

That my statement of the lack of belief in a god being atheism is an opinion.

Heh - nooooo, that's not an opinion. That's a fact.

Your second post however read as snarky to me, though and I'm sure it was.

As previously stated, a post that is not meant to generate discussion is not ED material and I am continuously encountering trolls and Poes in this forum. Hence the short temper with a post that's not claiming to be ED material.

Quote:

But my original comment to you was not meant to incite such a reaction.

I understand better now. Thank you.

Quote:

It came off to me as if I came off to you with a different tone.

It certainly looks that way. We can begin again, though. emotion_c8

[kanako irigashi]

Infamy In Action

kanako irigashi

Are we talking about someone who is really Agnostic?

What do you mean? sweatdrop

Here.

[Logic Not Included]

Infamy In Action

My 5am Rant

How often I hear this.... burning_eyes By definition, if you don't believe in any gods, you ARE an atheist.
What. No. That's stupid. There are many, many religions who do not have a deity, and are not atheist.
It's normal to be in denial about it considering the negative stigma that accompanies the word in our society, but by owning up to the word and just being your wonderful self, you are helping resolve the issue.
One again, lack of belief of a god doesn't automatically place you in the category of atheist. By that logic a man who only knew of Christianity rejecting Christ would be an atheist. He could easily fall into any of the other religions, but by not knowing any, and rejecting all the gods he know of, you say he is an atheist. There is a logic flaw there.
Society is afraid of what it doesn't know and atheists are a minority, so nasty stereotypes arise and names are called. But when you own up to it, the next time your friend's parents ask you whether you want a little chinese or mexican for dinner, your friend can go "Hey! Adam is an Atheist, he's actually a really nice guy and he does NOT eat babies!" (Yeah, your friend is an idiot. And kinda racist. But it can't be helped.)
Wha--
For one outing someone as an atheist is counter productive. It makes the person seem weak for not doing it themselves.
Two, why the hell would hey even insinuate that Adam eats babies. That's just stupid.
Lastly, saying atheism is a minority, so nasty stereotypes arise is a logic flaw. Nasty stereotypes arise regardless of the popularity. True that since less people are atheist, that there are less people to refute the claims, but by no means do a lesser popularity spur hate.


"But I'm still spiritual."
There are a ton of spiritual atheists. More than you think. Spirituality and Religion do not have to mean the same thing. Some atheists are very new-agey and believe in more than just what is physically presented to us, they just deny the god factor.
To avoid confusion I'll use blue. Yet again, just because someone isn't what you are doesn't mean they fit in a counter-category. You can't use someone's claim for not being something as a means for being something.
"I'm not gay because I like the other gender."
Using your logic - "A lot of gay people like the other gender."

"But I don't believe in nothing..."
And you don't have to. There is something much bigger than you or I and that's humanity. Mosts Atheists I know are secular humanists. They put their faith, community, and charity into the world and the people inhabiting it no strings attached. So no, "Hey, we'll build this school for your village, but remember our specific God is the only reason we're doing this." (I could rant and rant about mission trips, but later.)
This is actually the first thing I found to make sense, but they way it's put is hard to follow. True that atheists don't believe in nothing, but that's because it's illogical to believe in nothing. By existing, you are proof that there is something. That be a god, or aliens, or literally anything you want to believe, but EVERYONE believes in something. Unless of course, you're one of the people who believe that us existing is proof we don't, but that's a circular logic rabbit hole you don't want to fall down.

"But I can't PROVE that some god doesn't exist..."
If you can't find any proof for a god, but know you can't flat out deny that there may be one more than you could deny the existence of an invisible pink unicorn that silently follows you everywhere you go, you are an agnostic atheist.
I think you want to re-write this one. About midway through you just lost me.

"I don't believe, and generally couldn't care less about the debates or politics."
Hello, Apatheist! Apathetic atheists weren't fooled by the smoke and mirrors they pulled out at church and just don't care about changing minds. In my experience, most Atheists are apathetic up until someone's religious belief's impede on someone else's civil and human rights, at which point they become a Militant Atheist fighting on the front lines for change.
I have a problem with this one. Just because someone doesn't care about religion doesn't mean they are something they don't claim to be. But, i'm not here to offend so i'll wrap this up.

For all you TL;DR folks, you shouldn't place people into groups based on stereotype and bias. If someone identifies as non-atheist you can't just say they are because they fit the bill. Religious views are subjective, and as much as I appreciate that you want to help people find who they are, what they are may not be what you say they are.

[Rumblestiltskin]

kanako irigashi

Infamy In Action

kanako irigashi

Are we talking about someone who is really Agnostic?

What do you mean? sweatdrop

Here.

Agnosticism and atheism aren't mutually exclusive, as a/gnosticism refers to knowledge, while a/theism refers to belief. In short...yes, OP is talking about agnostics and how people use the label.

[Amarok Anernerk]

[Mei tsuki7]

Define god. The issue with this entire debate on theism vs atheism vs agnosticism is that god or gods is extremely subjective and I'm not just talking about the different religious incarnations of deities. Two people may believe in the same thing but one person could call themselves an atheist and the other could call themselves a theist based on if they call that thing a god or not. Which basically makes this entire debate asinine and not worth anyones time.

[Sugar Frosted Steel]

The Legendary Guest

Infamy In Action

The Legendary Guest

Infamy In Action

Obviously the post is here to be public and talked about. But when you ask "What do you want to discuss?" As though the post itself and whatever any commenter adds isn't the obvious thing to discuss, there's nothing else to talk about.

Is there something wrong with seeking clarity then, to your way of thinking?

Quote:

Like you just did.

Did what? Ask for clarity? Ask for the OP to define the topic instead of trying to glean one from a rant, which may be incorrect?

Quote:

Like I said, If someone wants to add an idea to it, which you clearly did, I would discuss it. So again, why would it be an opinion?

Quote:

What "idea" are you under the impression I am adding here?

Quote:

Also, none of what I said should've come off as a threat to you.

Interesting comment to make, considering I didn't take it that way.

Quote:

There's no reason to be so on the offensive. yum_cupcake

Also interesting that you take me as being "on the offensive". Why is that?

No. Of course not.

Glad we cleared that up, because I am a real stickler for clarification. wink

Quote:

Sorry, I tried my best not to come off as snarky.(I edited my post 3 times as I misread your post and probably the tone in it.) I was sincerely answering, nothing unless someone wants to add or argue.

I see how that could come about. I did mean that sincerely when I asked what you'd like to discuss but I did not go back and see your editing, and I am inclined to take things that are not expressly ED material very poorly due to the overwhelming number of trolls we get in here.

Quote:

That my statement of the lack of belief in a god being atheism is an opinion.

Heh - nooooo, that's not an opinion. That's a fact.

Your second post however read as snarky to me, though and I'm sure it was.

As previously stated, a post that is not meant to generate discussion is not ED material and I am continuously encountering trolls and Poes in this forum. Hence the short temper with a post that's not claiming to be ED material.

Quote:

But my original comment to you was not meant to incite such a reaction.

I understand better now. Thank you.

Quote:

It came off to me as if I came off to you with a different tone.

It certainly looks that way. We can begin again, though. emotion_c8

As you should be~ sweatdrop

It's hard to know how someone means to say something in this forum as people are often out to insult each other sarcastically and draw blood.... Especially the damn trolls. I try to stick with emoticons as much as possible on the internet, but they too can also come off as sarcastic here so I've avoided them... gonk

Oh okay, I just read your post really weirdly then... Well why are we arguing if we're on the same side?? XD

Honestly it was mostly me just being defensive when I said "I don't want to discuss anything..." as if the question could be a trap somehow.... ._.

Okay great! 3nodding Well the infographic you provided is one I saw a while ago and was kind of in the back of my head when writing this. Despite one's personal feelings towards the word, community or movement, you are what you are. A black person saying "I'm not black, I don't believe in races." is still black. :L Hopefully in the future we'll be in a place where races or the word "atheist" won't need to exist . But at this point in time, they do.

[Aporeia]

Theism/Atheism becomes complicated on a point in which an individual believes in a god(s) existence, but shows no reverence.

It is a strange, and distinct viewpoint, but one that exists, regardless.

[Rumblestiltskin]

Logic Not Included

What. No. That's stupid. There are many, many religions who do not have a deity, and are not atheist.

And those religions would be atheistic by nature. Also, atheism isn't mutually exclusive with anything, except for theism. So while a person may choose to apply a label of what they believe rather than one that expresses disbelief, that doesn't make them any less of an atheist if they don't believe in a god claim.

Quote:

One again, lack of belief of a god doesn't automatically place you in the category of atheist.

Actually, yes it does. You might not choose to label yourself as such, but if you lack a belief in god, then yes, you'd be an atheist.

Quote:

By that logic a man who only knew of Christianity rejecting Christ would be an atheist.

Not necessarily. If they reject Jesus, but still believe in a god, even if they don't know what that label would be, they'd still be a theist. Also, not all christians believe that jesus was god...

Quote:

He could easily fall into any of the other religions, but by not knowing any, and rejecting all the gods he know of, you say he is an atheist. There is a logic flaw there.

The only flaw is your misunderstanding of the point. The person wouldn't have to join a religion to have a god claim or not.

Quote:

For one outing someone as an atheist is counter productive. It makes the person seem weak for not doing it themselves.

Pretty sure that was just a joke....

Quote:

Two, why the hell would hey even insinuate that Adam eats babies. That's just stupid.

There are a lot of misconceptions about atheism, and they usually involve atheists being terrible people...eating babies is just an example of how some theists treat atheists.

Quote:

Lastly, saying atheism is a minority, so nasty stereotypes arise is a logic flaw.

....It would be...if that's what OP said. But they didn't. Atheism is a minority...and stereotypes are made about it...but OP said nothing about that being a causal link.

Quote:

Yet again, just because someone isn't what you are doesn't mean they fit in a counter-category.

......Which was OP's point. "Spiritual" doesn't mean "not atheist."

Quote:

You can't use someone's claim for not being something as a means for being something.

You can if their reason for not being something is irrelevant to why they wouldn't be that. For example, "I don't watch anime because I like pizza"...You can do both...that's OP's point.

Quote:

"I'm not gay because I like the other gender."
Using your logic - "A lot of gay people like the other gender."

Here's a tip...considering you clearly don't understand the point, perhaps you shouldn't go around strawmanning your opponent.

Quote:

This is actually the first thing I found to make sense, but they way it's put is hard to follow. True that atheists don't believe in nothing, but that's because it's illogical to believe in nothing.

I'm sure a nihilist would disagree.

Quote:

By existing, you are proof that there is something.

No, you aren't. You could be a brain in a jar dreaming all this up. Or a computer simulation. And while we have no reason to believe that we are brains in a jar, we can't prove that we're not. This is the problem of hard solipsism, and it applies for everyone.

Quote:

That be a god, or aliens, or literally anything you want to believe, but EVERYONE believes in something.

Yet, there are theists who make the assertion that, since atheists don't believe in god, they must believe in nothing. It's a common assertion, as I've heard it several times myself.

Quote:

Unless of course, you're one of the people who believe that us existing is proof we don't, but that's a circular logic rabbit hole you don't want to fall down.

I have a feeling you're misrepresenting someone else's beliefs here...which seems to be a bad habit of yours.

Quote:

I think you want to re-write this one. About midway through you just lost me.

Some theists like to assert that atheism is illogical because atheists can't prove god doesn't exist. However, it is not on the person hearing the claim to disprove the claim. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim, and asserting otherwise is an attempt to shift the burden of proof.

Quote:

I have a problem with this one. Just because someone doesn't care about religion doesn't mean they are something they don't claim to be.

They could be. Just because a person doesn't claim that they're overweight doesn't mean they aren't overweight. Though, for the record, I disagree with OP on this one, as not all apatheists are atheists. It would depend on the person...though, if they don't care whether or not a god exists, it's probably a safe assumption that they don't believe a god claim, so they would be atheists...but I'm sure there are several who don't care whether a god exists but think that one does.

Quote:

For all you TL;DR folks, you shouldn't place people into groups based on stereotype and bias.

While true, that isn't what OP was doing....

Quote:

If someone identifies as non-atheist you can't just say they are because they fit the bill.

If they lack a belief in a god claim, then they ARE an atheist. Though, what label a person chooses shouldn't be of any concern of anyone else...

Quote:

Religious views are subjective,

Not all religions would agree with that. In fact, there are some that would say that you actually know that they're right and are actively denying the truth if you don't agree with them. That would make their views objective...and while we would probably both disagree with them, if they can prove that to be true, that wold mean that religious views are not subjective.

Quote:

and as much as I appreciate that you want to help people find who they are, what they are may not be what you say they are.

They are if they fit the description...a point you clearly don't understand.

[Rumblestiltskin]

Aporeia

Theism/Atheism becomes complicated on a point in which an individual believes in a god(s) existence, but shows no reverence.

It is a strange, and distinct viewpoint, but one that exists, regardless.

...It doesn't complicate the matter at all. Maltheists, for example, are theists...they just hate the god they believe in. If you believe in a god, reverence towards that god is irrelevant to whether you are a theist or not.

[Rumblestiltskin]

Mei tsuki7

Define god.

Irrelevant. An actual definition of god may be impossible to begin with, but that's irrelevant to whether a person has a belief in a god or does not have a belief in a god.

Quote:

The issue with this entire debate on theism vs atheism vs agnosticism

Agnosticism isn't mutually exclusive from a/theism...It is only mutually exclusive from gnosticism.

Quote:

is that god or gods is extremely subjective and I'm not just talking about the different religious incarnations of deities. Two people may believe in the same thing but one person could call themselves an atheist and the other could call themselves a theist based on if they call that thing a god or not.

....Okay...and? There are people who believe that nature is god, which would make them theists, but not labeling nature god doesn't mean that the person doesn't believe in nature. What you're talking about is entirely plausible, but does nothing to demonstrate an actual point to counter what OP is talking about.

Quote:

Which basically makes this entire debate asinine and not worth anyones time.

I don't think it is, but if you do, why are you talking about it if you find it "asinine" and "not worth anyone's time?"

[Aporeia]

Rumblestiltskin

Aporeia

Theism/Atheism becomes complicated on a point in which an individual believes in a god(s) existence, but shows no reverence.

It is a strange, and distinct viewpoint, but one that exists, regardless.

...It doesn't complicate the matter at all. Maltheists, for example, are theists...they just hate the god they believe in. If you believe in a god, reverence towards that god is irrelevant to whether you are a theist or not.

Until you try to define a god and a spirit separately.