Originally posted by lil bitchinessSpeaking of which...
I'll meditate on that.
Likely, we're not going to see any major changes regarding how Man practices his spirituality/religion, and for that matter his politics, economics, science, etc, until Man himself changes first, changes involving how he sees himself in relation to the universe, reality, his very consciousness. And this is probably not going to happen for a very long, long time.
on digi's scale (digi scale? oh man... lol) I'm a 4 - 5, depending on the distinction. I'm certainly as sure of the non-existance as I am of anything else.
Originally posted by zoom3
I'm pretty sure that the old definitions of "atheism" would tick off just about every atheist there is. I'm guessing that that's why the definitions have been changed.
you mean the old definitions where some christians called other christians atheists?
Gonna try to expand on this here. Failure incoming.
Notes:
- Idk = I don't know (with certainty)
- This deals only with the "ultimate reality" question. "Lesser" gods (Thor, for example) would not qualify on this scale, because they don't represent an ultimate cause. This list only deals with positions on an "ultimate" deity.
- I tried to allow room for, say, Buddhists, who can be classified as atheists toward their beliefs on God, but certainly have mystic or spiritual beliefs that most atheists don't. #6 is for them.
- It's generally assumed that for 6-10, each number encompasses most or all of the beliefs of the numbers below it (a person who believes in God, for example, will in almost all cases believe in souls, transcendent realities like heaven, etc.)
- The difference between 1-2 and 9-10 is in tone only. No meaningful distinction can be made in the belief itself, but in the approach of the individual. I've left 1 and 10 there to denote the most adamant of militants. Obviously degrees exist within categories (I believe strongly or somewhat strongly), but one must draw the lines somewhere.
- Criticism is welcome.
10 - I know there is a God
9 - There is a God
8 - Idk, but I believe there is a God
7 - Idk, but I believe there is a creative force/higher intelligence/guiding power/deistic god that controls or created reality but isn't an entirely omniscient/omnipotent God or isn't God as defined by any religion
6 - Idk, but I lack belief in gods, and believe in spiritual forces (transcendent realities, souls, reincarnation, etc.)
5 - I don't know (true agnosticism)
4 - "Idk, but I do not have a belief in any god"
3 - "Idk, but I believe there is no God"
2 - "There is no God"
1 - "I know there is no God"
...
I also struggled with a category between 5-6 of "I believe in something, but it is undefined" which is neither true agnosticism nor as pointed as #6. You could also qualify 9 and 10 with "and I know which God it is that exists" to make it stronger. Still, we can subdivide these until we're blue in the face. Gotta say no at some point.
I see it somewhat like a bell curve. 3-8 represent probably 95% of the population of Earth. Though the curve would peak somewhere above agnosticism, so it wouldn't be a symmetrical curve.
Thoughts?
Originally posted by Digi
Gonna try to expand on this here. Failure incoming.Notes:
- Idk = I don't know (with certainty)
- This deals only with the "ultimate reality" question. "Lesser" gods (Thor, for example) would not qualify on this scale, because they don't represent an ultimate cause. This list only deals with positions on an "ultimate" deity.
- I tried to allow room for, say, Buddhists, who can be classified as atheists toward their beliefs on God, but certainly have mystic or spiritual beliefs that most atheists don't. #6 is for them.
- It's generally assumed that for 6-10, each number encompasses most or all of the beliefs of the numbers below it (a person who believes in God, for example, will in almost all cases believe in souls, transcendent realities like heaven, etc.)
- The difference between 1-2 and 9-10 is in tone only. No meaningful distinction can be made in the belief itself, but in the approach of the individual. I've left 1 and 10 there to denote the most adamant of militants. Obviously degrees exist within categories (I believe strongly or somewhat strongly), but one must draw the lines somewhere.
- Criticism is welcome.10 - I know there is a God
9 - There is a God
8 - Idk, but I believe there is a God
7 - Idk, but I believe there is a creative force/higher intelligence/guiding power/deistic god that controls or created reality but isn't an entirely omniscient/omnipotent God or isn't God as defined by any religion
6 - Idk, but I lack belief in gods, and believe in spiritual forces (transcendent realities, souls, reincarnation, etc.)
5 - I don't know (true agnosticism)
4 - "Idk, but I do not have a belief in any god"
3 - "Idk, but I believe there is no God"
2 - "There is no God"
1 - "I know there is no God"...
I also struggled with a category between 5-6 of "I believe in something, but it is undefined" which is neither true agnosticism nor as pointed as #6. You could also qualify 9 and 10 with "and I know which God it is that exists" to make it stronger. Still, we can subdivide these until we're blue in the face. Gotta say no at some point.
I see it somewhat like a bell curve. 3-8 represent probably 95% of the population of Earth. Though the curve would peak somewhere above agnosticism, so it wouldn't be a symmetrical curve.
Thoughts?
You're much better at this than I am so I cannot really criticize what I would never have been able to quantify. I tried to do it today, to a friend at school and it just did not flow very well. Yours is much better than mine (I was focusing on a theistic scale).
I would be an 8 or a 7. Some of both. I think that almost all main religions don't have God quite right, including Mormonism, but they have many aspects of "Him" fairly close.
He can't be truly omni-everything as that creates all sorts of problems.
This is the problem of using a sliding scale.
But here is a real suggestion that you MAY find interesting: Your scale would probably work better as a two axis plot.
Maybe a 4 point plot of the following:
X axis:
-5 = Strong Atheism
5 = Strong Theism.
Y axis:
-5 = Strong mysticism
5 = Strong Naturalism.
A truly agnostic person would be plotted as (0,0). These types would be the frustratingly absurdist types: "I cannot know for sure if this glass of water is even real, or if I am even real. Nothing is real and everything is real, at the same time and no one can be sure of that, either. The only known truth is that nothing can be truly known."
A 5,5 type would be a strong evangelical Christian: "God created everything and God is in every aspect of our lives down to silly decisions like 'green tie or red tie'? Nothing is a coincidence and everything is directly influenced by God."
A -5, -5 would be: God definitely does not exist and I know this for a fact. There is nothing mystical at all about the universe: only the mystical persistence of ignorance. Everything is knowable. There is nothing transcendent (spiritually) about anything.
Originally posted by dadudemon
A -5, -5 would be: God definitely does not exist and I know this for a fact. There is nothing mystical at all about the universe: only the mystical persistence of ignorance. Everything is knowable. There is nothing transcendent (spiritually) about anything.
Originally posted by Mindship
Speaking of which...Likely, we're not going to see any major changes regarding how Man practices his spirituality/religion, and for that matter his politics, economics, science, etc, until Man himself changes first, changes involving how he sees himself in relation to the universe, reality, his very consciousness. And this is probably not going to happen for a very long, long time.
You did the meditating for me.
Now go reach the enlightenment and when you do, come back here and bestow it on me. Plzplzplzplzplz.
...
But on a serious note, I believe you're absolutely right. Also, we're all products of indoctrination to a certain degree. Problems lie in that some are more indoctrinated than others...
But as you said, we won't see any change for a long time. Kind of depressing.
Originally posted by lil bitchinessI'd make a lousy bodhisattva; I'm way too selfish.
You did the meditating for me.Now go reach the enlightenment and when you do, come back here and bestow it on me. Plzplzplzplzplz.
Originally posted by lil bitchinessCould be worse: we could've been born 1000 years ago. At least we're this much closer.
But on a serious note, I believe you're absolutely right. Also, we're all products of indoctrination to a certain degree. Problems lie in that some are more indoctrinated than others...But as you said, we won't see any change for a long time. Kind of depressing.
Originally posted by inimalist
bingo 😛
My bias is clarly showing. 😄
But, that is how I think, sometimes. If you remember my arguments with a banned member form years back (Devil King), I am sometimes extremely atheistic.
Feel free to reword my suggestion to not be so abrasive/rude to the other categories. 👆
What I'd really like is Digi's feedback because he's better at this category stuff.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I think you have your Y-axis backward, dadude.
You are correct, sir. It was after a long day (6 quizzes and 2 tests later. Waaah, I know).
Originally posted by Omega Vision
The Steven Hawking demographic.
Really? I still thought Stephen Hawking held that there is room for God in human lives? Just that...this God seems more like (Thanks Sym for the suggestions) Clarke's strong God with a "deist twist".
Originally posted by dadudemonThe last I heard from him he released a statement out of the blue a half year ago that God didn't exist and that an afterlife was "impossible" because brains are like computers and when a computer shuts down its programs and memory doesn't go to a higher place.
My bias is clarly showing. 😄But, that is how I think, sometimes. If you remember my arguments with a banned member form years back (Devil King), I am sometimes extremely atheistic.
Feel free to reword my suggestion to not be so abrasive/rude to the other categories. 👆
What I'd really like is Digi's feedback because he's better at this category stuff.
You are correct, sir. It was after a long day (6 quizzes and 2 tests later. Waaah, I know).
Really? I still thought Stephen Hawking held that there is room for God in human lives? Just that...this God seems more like (Thanks Sym for the suggestions) Clarke's strong God with a "deist twist".
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I like your staunch optimism. It makes me that little bit more optimistic.
Yes, 1000 years ago would suck - everywhere in the world.
Maybe. I can't say as I didn't live back then and I've never been to the Middle East or Polynesia 😛
Originally posted by Omega Vision
The last I heard from him he released a statement out of the blue a half year ago that God didn't exist and that an afterlife was "impossible" because brains are like computers and when a computer shuts down its programs and memory doesn't go to a higher place.
AHA!
Sounds like he is becoming jaded and cynical in his old age. He used to talk about God in everything. And from my observations, even atheists, as they get older, turn into theists...they just start to hope in things as they face mortality. The exact opposite is true of intellectuals, though (again, from my own observations).
Originally posted by dadudemon
AHA!Sounds like he is becoming jaded and cynical in his old age. He used to talk about God in everything. And from my observations, even atheists, as they get older, turn into theists...they just start to hope in things as they face mortality. The exact opposite is true of intellectuals, though (again, from my own observations).
AJ Ayer was an interesting case, a few years before his death he had a NDE and had a vision of heaven...he told his son that his unfaith was shaken but that he still didn't believe in an afterlife.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
The last I heard from him he released a statement out of the blue a half year ago that God didn't exist and that an afterlife was "impossible" because brains are like computers and when a computer shuts down its programs and memory doesn't go to a higher place.The Middle East and Polynesia may have actually been better off then than now.
Maybe. I can't say as I didn't live back then and I've never been to the Middle East or Polynesia 😛
Oh God, that's actually pretty weird when thinking about it. It probably was a lot better 1000 years ago.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Oh God, that's actually pretty weird when thinking about it. It probably was a lot better 1000 years ago.
I don't think the Middle East or the Arab World ever recovered from that.
Originally posted by dadudemonThe ol' "no atheists in foxholes" thing?
And from my observations, even atheists, as they get older, turn into theists...they just start to hope in things as they face mortality.
Originally posted by dadudemonIntellectuals, as in cynics?
The exact opposite is true of intellectuals, though (again, from my own observations).
I wonder if which way you go depends on how much anger you carry with you toward the end.