Religion

[Division56]

Here's the obligatory religion poll so we can all cite it against each other. I can't believe no one reposted it yet.

It's been slightly modified to include a neutral category for people who really never bother thinking about the spiritual.


:ph34r:



Link to old poll (http://intp.1.forumer.com/index.php?showtopic=172)

[Vagabond]

Jeez Div, repeating myself feels so good... :mad: :P :D

[Division56]

But really, how many posts started with "according to the religion polls in the flamethrower forum" at the old forum.

:D


People love citing it.

[Johnny]

Well, since discussion of religion and God have been what keeps bringing me back and moving my fingers over the keyboard, here goes:

Throughout my life, there has been the ability for me to think, imagine, and daydream over anything...the ability to kill time in my mind without guilt or a feeling of unwelcome consequences from within myself. I can give thought to infinity, omniscience, nothing, powerlessness, omnipotence, and so on. Can I display such things in the world and to others, repeat them for the cameras, and so on? Well, no, but I conceive them or am inspired to conceive them in my mind. And if I claim that God possesses these attributes, well, then I am compelled to acknowledge God.

To call myself an atheist is to deny a part of me that I respect and cherish. Maybe I'm too greedy, or afraid, or selfish in keeping that part of me...maybe the word "God" is nothing more than a layer of protection for my mind from the world (thanks AntiReconciler for the inspiration here), but it's like I shared in another post: it's not about cutting off an imaginary third arm for me, it's about cutting off my right arm, and I want my right arm accompanying my left arm in life. I can't within myself claim that God does not exist, or claim that I abandon God without consequence as Nietzche was capable of asserting.

William James asserts: why go into a frenzy over whether a squirrel running around a tree trunk, such that as you chase it you can never see it, really exists? It's just not useful to ponder such things. I don't disagree with this claim. I am attracted to pragmatism, to what works, and I'm an American. But here's where I part ways with Bill: as I am capable of it regardless, I am intent on making the mechanisms by which these useless ponderings are devised work somehow.

Now, as to whether life is to be lived as a Muslim, Christian, Jew, or whatever is another matter entirely. These are ways of life, scripts to follow. Such things are, really, best left to us to work out and most people are fine going with whatever it takes to simply get along with each other. Why? Because we are people, and people are an essential ingredient for the success of any religion - take, for example, Jesus, Mohammad, and Moses. Works even better if they aren't imaginary people with who knows what kind of superpowers to solidify their authority. But even with real people things can go wrong, struggles can ensue, and the best intentions can get buried underneath the rubble of "miracles", broken swords, what have you. Welcome to the challenge of living and getting along, right?

O.K., there's the latest articulation of my own case (or trap, depending on my mood) for heckling and dismantling...but it has been quite nice to be able to burst out with all this stuff.

[paladinoflunaria]

Omniscience and free will cannot coexist. Omnipotence is plain impossible. There's a Heinlein quote something like this: "If someone believes in a being that is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving, then boy do I have a deal for him."

Jim knows Heinlein very well. Correct me if I misquoted.

[Johnny]

Paladinoflunaria: Omniscience and free will cannot coexist.

That doesn't make sense to me. If I were omniscient, one would think I'd have the brains to get past such simple difficulties, right?

[Avengardh]

Used to be an Atheist, now I am just Spiritual, and no, you can't come back at me with "But you are displaying a Ché icon!" he's much more than that to me.

~*Aven*~

[Claverhouse]

I put Spiritual, despite my --- in all things --- absolutist belief, as I guessed the last was for people who belong to a definite group...



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[paladinoflunaria]

spir·i·tu·al·ism [ spÃrrichoo É™ lìzzÉ™m ]

noun

1. paranormal belief in communication with dead people: the belief that the spirits of dead people can communicate with the living, especially through mediums.
Also called spiritism

2. paranormal practices of communicating with dead people: the practices used among people who believe that communication occurs between the dead and the living

3. religion beliefs emphasizing spiritual matters: a system of belief that emphasizes the spiritual nature of existence

4. philosophy philosophy emphasizing spiritual nature of reality: the philosophical doctrine that all reality is spiritual, not material

5. spiritual state: the quality or state of being spiritual




re·li·gion [ ri lÃjjÉ™n ] (plural re·li·gions)

noun

1. religion beliefs and worship: people’s beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life

2. religion particular system: a particular institutionalized or personal system of beliefs and practices relating to the divine

3. personal beliefs or values: a set of strongly-held beliefs, values, and attitudes that somebody lives by

4. obsession: an object, practice, cause, or activity that somebody is completely devoted to or obsessed by
The danger is that you start to make fitness a religion.

5. christianity monk’s or nun’s life: life as a monk or a nun, especially in the Roman Catholic Church


I'd go with 4. on spiritualism and none of them on religion. I don't believe, I conjecture. I am anti-religious but I am spirtual (so I'm not somewhat religious).

Believing is lying to oneself on most occasions.[/b]

[Jezebel]

I'd say "apatheist" best describes me. I used to go through all the trouble of arguing religion and examining all the points that didn't make sense to me. I used to think about my spirituality a lot. These days I'd say that I just don't care. People seem to view that as a bad thing as if it makes one shallow. But, whatever.

[file cabinet]

I am at the point where I just don't care.

[Johnny]

Yes, it can turn into a fatiguing mental exercise. But INTP'ers are strong, and religion's a durable mental exercise machine.

[Jezebel]

Yes, it can turn into a fatiguing mental exercise. But INTP'ers are strong, and religion's a durable mental exercise machine.

I quit caring not due to it being too much of a mental exercise, but from deciding that it didn't matter and there were other things I'd rather think about.

[paladinoflunaria]

Philosophy over religion. That's me.

[Johnny]

I quit caring not due to it being too much of a mental exercise, but from deciding that it didn't matter and there were other things I'd rather think about.
Good exercise programs acknowledge the need for rest. You're not doing anything wrong here in my book.

[The Architect]

hmm, I'm not sure I'm ready to post a full statement of what I believe and why (I'll get around to it eventually) but so you know, I'm a very strong believer in Christ, but not at all in a conventional manner (partly because I see so many hypocrites within the church arguing over insignificant details while ignoring major issues, and partly because I actually disagree with some of the accepted definitions of some words in the bible.)

More on all that later though, I don't quite have the time or energy right now to post a detailed description on my beliefs.

[paladinoflunaria]

I grew up in a Christian family, and my mom was confirmed as a Catholic 4 +/- 1 years ago (My brother and I were baptized Catholic the same time). I've always been more interested in the spiritual than the physical, but the Christian religion just erks me. I can tolerate it, but now that I consider myself a radical atheist, I just wish that my mom's friends/co-workers would stop treating me as if I was Catholic, or even Christian.

[Jkrs]

How does radical atheism compare to standard atheism, aside from people no longer mistaking you for agnostic?

[Anacaona]

I consider myself "spiritual" I believe in a superior and infinite Power. I'm not Atheist because I think everything in the Universe (life, nature) didn't happen by chance...
I'm still officialy a Catholic but I don't really go to Church or try to follow Catholic teachings... I take different philosophies of different religions or New Age religions or great Thinkers. They all have a little bit of Thruth to them. I don't think I could limit myself to one religion in Particular and reject everything that's different from it... Im still on a quest...

[Claverhouse]

How does radical atheism compare to standard atheism, aside from people no longer mistaking you for agnostic?

It's more pro-active: you tell God He doesn't exist, as well as telling everyone else...



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Hunter]

I mostly consider myself spiritual...there's something out there, but no one's got it right yet...

[Claverhouse]

So far the religious are winning. Hurrah !

Still, does Apatheist mean agnostic, pantheist, or apathetic ? Some of them might be confused; not that the apathetics will actually care.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Hunter]

So far the religious are winning. Hurrah !

Still, does Apatheist mean agnostic, pantheist, or apathetic ? Some of them might be confused; not that the apathetics will actually care.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

You're right. We don't...

Oh wait, I voted spiritual didn't I? Blast!

[HairlessBluetick]

I would imagine "apatheist" means apathetically theist?

[nobarcode]

How does radical atheism compare to standard atheism, aside from people no longer mistaking you for agnostic?

It's more pro-active: you tell God He doesn't exist, as well as telling everyone else...



Claverhouse :ph34r:
:rofl: I apologize for not being serious, but that is some funny shit right there.

An American thing, at off-ramps and street signals:

"will work for food." "homeless, need money for food, please help." "Have wife and kids....hungry (*note* no wife and "kids" in sight.)


"God doesn't exist, I can't explain why, but I'm sure of it, please help"

:rolleyes:

[Sugaraddict2702]

I've been a catholic since birth, was baptised, but am thinking strongly about letting my name being erased from the register. I have nothing against catholicism or christianity in general, but I know I don't believe in it, so I see no reason for me to be officially listed as one.

For a short time I've been reading a lot about paganism, but after a year I came to the conclusion that's not my cup of tea either. Right now I have a tendency of being an atheist, but the truth is I'm still searching.
I will know when I've found my path, for now I'm content with the searching.

Ellen*

[paladinoflunaria]

I never practiced a religion until I was 12. My mom was raised Baptist and she took my brother and I to a Baptist church when my father left. After a few months she decided to join the Catholic church (didn't like all of the slander of homosexuals that was going on in the Baptist church, and probably because some of my father's family was Catholic). So my brother and I were baptized Catholic (I was about 13), and my mother was confirmed. I can't think of exactly when I turned away from religion, but it was about 9 months ago. While I was still part of the Catholic church, I was pretty devout. I never missed a Sunday, attended PSR, went to confession pretty often, and that junk. I look back and see a foolish boy. I guess as long as I look back and see that I was more foolish than I am now, I'm doing something right.

[jimkopelli]

I had pretty much the same thing. We went to a bunch of different churches in the area (this was around about when I was 7 or 8) and finally found this one Presbyterian one that we (meaning my mother) liked. We went there, and I got kinda involved... handbells, choir, candle dude, etc... I was bored during services, so I read the only thing available... Thank you, Mr. Gutenberg. Mom knew that my brother and I were bored to tears, and we were claiming unfairness (Dad got to stay home and go to the church of nascar. Don't get me wrong, I couldn't care less about rednecks driving in a circle. It was that he got to stay home that got me.) Eventually, we worked out a deal where we went to church less. Eventually, some genius appointed a registered child molester to the board of deacons, and there was a flaming row, and we left for good. With nothing better to do with my mornings on the weekends, I read, and I thought. I read about the Crusades, and the politics, and the witch hunts, and stupidity. I read Douglas Adams (one of the more recent proclaimed radical atheists, a pity he's dead) and Heinlein (Stranger in a Strange Land. Grok?) I figured that there were better ways to explain things than a great bearded man in a cloud.

[Birdsnest]

I am a spiritualist.

[HairlessBluetick]

Quote:
"will work for food." "homeless, need money for food, please help." "Have wife and kids....hungry (*note* no wife and "kids" in sight.)



"God doesn't exist, I can't explain why, but I'm sure of it, please help"

Seen by my sister when she was living in Berkeley: "Money (f)or pot please", and by me in Cincinnati "I won't lie: I need Booze".

[Seraph]

I think it's amazingly difficult for an INTP to be religious. Religion isn't logical, it's not tangible, it's something that must be believed in, which requires all the fight in the world for us. We're constantly questioning "truths" and, for us, faith almost never comes into play. And INTP that finds his or her way into heaven deserves the fluffiest cloud in the pearly gates.

I know I'm trying hard. I try to pray at night, and I feel like my prayers -- if you could even call them that -- are becoming more and more repetitive. I don't feel like I'm talking to an entity, I feel like I'm pandering so that I don't end up in hell. It's frustrating. Perhaps we may be too smart for our own good.

My one encouragement is my dad, who is a Rational (an INTJ, I think) and a Christian. I think he struggled with believing when he was my age also. I can only hope I go on some spiritual trek or whatever and find a way to become a true Rational Christian instead of a pretender.

[Star Cannon]

I have no religion and I am perfectly happy with that.

[ronbus]

I'm a little surprised in an INTP forum, that so many people are religous. It seems to me if you are an INTP, you will eventually become agnostic. In other words, there is no proof of God's existance or proof against God's existance. Sure it makes you feel better if there were this all-powerful being watching over us, but INTPs aren't feelers. Some like the idea of having closure on a question, but INTPs are percievers, not judgers.

It surprises me even more that a poll on an INTP forum about religious belief doesn't have the option agnostic.

[SensEye]

Well, "non-believer" could be equated to agnostic.

[int]

I'm a little surprised in an INTP forum, that so many people are religous. It seems to me if you are an INTP, you will eventually become agnostic. In other words, there is no proof of God's existance or proof against God's existance. Sure it makes you feel better if there were this all-powerful being watching over us, but INTPs aren't feelers. Some like the idea of having closure on a question, but INTPs are percievers, not judgers.

It surprises me even more that a poll on an INTP forum about religious belief doesn't have the option agnostic.

Welcome. :)

So what can you deduce from your response, and the poll results?

[Sam172]

I have no religion and I am perfectly happy with that.

Thats quite unlike me. I have no religion and it makes me a worried person....

I would love to be religious, just it's all so irrational and unbelieveable to me.
Therefore I have an incredible fear of death...

[BritainOphira]

I have no religion and I am perfectly happy with that.

Thats quite unlike me. I have no religion and it makes me a worried person....

I would love to be religious, just it's all so irrational and unbelieveable to me.
Therefore I have an incredible fear of death...

My lack of religious beliefs bothers me, but it doesn't make me fear death. Instead, I fear having been brainwashed into believing that you must be religious, or that there is one correct belief system that humans could possibly understand.

[Sam172]

I have no religion and I am perfectly happy with that.

Thats quite unlike me. I have no religion and it makes me a worried person....

I would love to be religious, just it's all so irrational and unbelieveable to me.
Therefore I have an incredible fear of death...

My lack of religious beliefs bothers me, but it doesn't make me fear death. Instead, I fear having been brainwashed into believing that you must be religious, or that there is one correct belief system that humans could possibly understand.

Live life in a morally fulfilling way.

Sounds like a single correct belief to me :D

[Johnny]

It seems to me if you are an INTP, you will eventually become agnostic.

Is there no place for religion in a perceiving personality type? It's an interesting question.

For those who answer either yes or no, are they no longer perceivers? For those who decide not to answer and leave the matter open, does this make them judgers? :lol:

[Seraph]

I have no religion and I am perfectly happy with that.

Thats quite unlike me. I have no religion and it makes me a worried person....

I would love to be religious, just it's all so irrational and unbelieveable to me.
Therefore I have an incredible fear of death...

I know how you feel, buddy! :(

It also surprises me that so many INTP's -- or any other type for that matter -- seem content with the idea that there's no supreme being and no afterlife. For me, nonexistence following death is the most haunting idea in the world. I can't fathom suddenly ceasing to exist...no longer being able to breathe or speak or think...imagine it. We spend our whole lives in our minds. And the next minute, it's gone forever...we're nothing, unthinking, unfeeling, unjudging, unpercieving. The thought of hell is better than nonexistence!

But if God does exist, why would He create a group of people who have such an intensely difficult time with faith? ESFJ's have no problem whatsoever with religion. It doesn't seem fair to me.

[Miss Padfoot]

How does radical atheism compare to standard atheism, aside from people no longer mistaking you for agnostic?

It's more pro-active: you tell God He doesn't exist, as well as telling everyone else...



Claverhouse :ph34r:What's even better is telling God he's stupid as well as non-existent. Ever read Catch-22? Let me quote:


"And don't tell me God works in mysterious ways," Yossarian continued.... "There's nothing so mysterious about it. He's not working at all. He's playing. Or else He's forgotten all about us. That's the kind of God you people talk about - a country bumpkin, a clumsy, bungling, brainless, conceited, uncouth hayseed. Good God, how much reverence can you have for a Supreme Being who finds it necessary to include such phenomena as phlegm and tooth decay in His divine system of creation? What in the world was running through that warped, evil, scatological mind of His when he robbed old people of the power to control their bowel movements? ... What a colossal, immortal blunderer! When you consider the opportunity and power He had to really do a job, and then look at the stupid, ugly little mess He made of it instead, His sheer incompetence is almost staggering. It's obvious he never met a payroll. Why, no self-respecting businessman would hire a bungler like Him as even a shipping clerk!"

I love that book.

[Miss Padfoot]

It also surprises me that so many INTP's -- or any other type for that matter -- seem content with the idea that there's no supreme being and no afterlife. For me, nonexistence following death is the most haunting idea in the world. I can't fathom suddenly ceasing to exist...no longer being able to breathe or speak or think...imagine it. We spend our whole lives in our minds. And the next minute, it's gone forever...we're nothing, unthinking, unfeeling, unjudging, unpercieving. The thought of hell is better than nonexistence!I disagree. The thought of nonexistence after death is comforting for me, like the Buddhist ideal of Nirvana: a release from the stresses of life. But the uncertainty in death is very scary for me. What if, after all this time, I'm wrong? What if the Christians are right and I go to hell? That's immeasurably worse. We're talking about forever here.


But if God does exist, why would He create a group of people who have such an intensely difficult time with faith? ESFJ's have no problem whatsoever with religion. It doesn't seem fair to me.Now that I definitely agree with. It seems to me that people's brains are somewhat programmed towards or against religion, and some people have an easier time than others. It's almost like Calvinist predestination or something: the SJs are the elect and we're the reprobate.

[Vagabond]

I strongly disagree with the possibility of my brains being programmed towards or against anything. I need to believe I decide for myself. Otherwise, I might as well jump off a cliff and at least enjoy the flight.

[Miss Padfoot]

From an utilitarian standpoint, I agree with you. If I let myself think my brain is programmed, I'll become passive. To avoid doing that, I tell myself I'm in complete control. It's really the only way to live.

[SensEye]

It seems to me that people's brains are somewhat programmed towards or against religion, and some people have an easier time than others.

I saw a science show (NOVA I think) some time ago that put forth the proposition that the human brain was somewhat hardwired to order things. Order in the sense that it trys to attach a relative importance to things. I don't recall the details now but they had some good reasoning as to how this could account for the widespread tendency for human societies to be religious.

So maybe not on an individual basis, but the human brain in general may be programmed towards religion.

[Johnny]

Why can't an ESFJ be an atheist or agnostic?

[Seraph]

Why can't an ESFJ be an atheist or agnostic?

Because they can't form their own thoughts, you know that. ;)

Well, they can...but at least with most of the ESF's I've met, they say something like, "Jesus loves all of us, and I can't wait to spend an eternity with him forever!" It's like they're quoting things out of a pamphlet but believing every word of it.

[Google Monster]

To not exist isn't that bad. Accepting death is just accepting the system and rules our universe follows. I wouldn't want to play poker with someone who insist on having extra cards.

[Johnny]

..with most of the ESF's I've met, they say something like, "Jesus loves all of us, and I can't wait to spend an eternity with him forever!"

How do you know that they aren't INTP'ers who are showing you their Ne and Fe?

[Laeskis]

God is eternal and cannot die.
God is omnipotent and can do anything.

Can God kill himself?

If so...he can die....he is not Immortal.
If not, he can't do everything...he's not omnipotent.

Neat to think about...

[Google Monster]

With what I was thinking about last night I believe that god also has limits even more so than us.

[giftedmadness@hotmail.com]

try the book God After Darwin

[Claverhouse]

God is eternal and cannot die.
God is omnipotent and can do anything.

Can God kill himself?

If so...he can die....he is not Immortal.
If not, he can't do everything...he's not omnipotent.

Neat to think about...


Yeah but: If God could cause Himself not to exist, then He could also cause Himself to return immediately from that state of non-existence.

Omnipotence is All.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Johnny]

Yeah but: If God could cause Himself not to exist, then He could also cause Himself to return immediately from that state of non-existence.

You're suggesting something that transcends existence and non-existence then, and offering an elaborate "no". :sombrero:

[Claverhouse]

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D



Claverhouse :ph34r:



[ We cannot conceive God ]

[Nor His purposes ]

[Johnny]

.... :sombrero:

:ph34r:

[Arioch]

I'm a little surprised in an INTP forum, that so many people are religous. It seems to me if you are an INTP, you will eventually become agnostic. In other words, there is no proof of God's existance or proof against God's existance. Sure it makes you feel better if there were this all-powerful being watching over us, but INTPs aren't feelers. Some like the idea of having closure on a question, but INTPs are percievers, not judgers.

It surprises me even more that a poll on an INTP forum about religious belief doesn't have the option agnostic.

I am in turn always a bit surprised when I hear such a response. [edit: Clarify: that there is no evidence for God. That even religious INTP's do not seem to have any proof]

While I have had some crises in faith (particulery after I have tried my faith against the best arguments of it's opposers) in general I have collected a fair amount of evidence that indicates that the God I worship really does exist.

I do not really have the time nor energy to explain it right now so perhaps I shall tell you what happend last time I explained it in a MSN conversation. Now the other person was a Christian INFP (I believe Jehova Witness) and after I explained he said that compared to Christianity my own religion was more based on gnostic. Where Christianity is based more on "mysteries" and "the Way of Love" mine was based more on the believer being guided by knowledge. Both self and other kind.

[Claverhouse]

And of course, there's always hope as well as faith. I do not see how being of a particular psych-type renders one incapable of any particular quality. Faith and hope may even be gifts, but we all have these twins to some degree.

They are finely combined in Longfellow's pretty rendition of Friedrich v. Logau's beautiful Retribution:

Though the mills of God grind slowly,
yet they grind exceeding small;
Though with patience he stands waiting,
with exactness grinds he all.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Ckyzxr]

If atheism is confined to not believing the mainstream modern or past "definitions of God" then I'm atheist. But I still consider spirituality a facet of my existence, even if it's just a side effect of my consciousness.

From my mental ramblings, I have concluded that religion is borne from the need for humans to explain those things which we have not yet learned or are incapabable of intellectually fathoming or accepting at this time. The mythical gods served the same purpose as the modern god(s) do; to explain life, death, and those things not yet understood. Events like earthquakes, tornadoes, and volcanic eruptions are STILL referred to as "acts of God".

[cloakable]

"And don't tell me God works in mysterious ways," Yossarian continued.... "There's nothing so mysterious about it. He's not working at all. He's playing. Or else He's forgotten all about us. That's the kind of God you people talk about - a country bumpkin, a clumsy, bungling, brainless, conceited, uncouth hayseed. Good God, how much reverence can you have for a Supreme Being who finds it necessary to include such phenomena as phlegm and tooth decay in His divine system of creation? What in the world was running through that warped, evil, scatological mind of His when he robbed old people of the power to control their bowel movements? ... What a colossal, immortal blunderer! When you consider the opportunity and power He had to really do a job, and then look at the stupid, ugly little mess He made of it instead, His sheer incompetence is almost staggering. It's obvious he never met a payroll. Why, no self-respecting businessman would hire a bungler like Him as even a shipping clerk!"

:rofl: :cheers:

Anothe book added to my 'to read' list.

[Johnny]

I have concluded that religion is borne from the need for humans to explain those things which we have not yet learned or are incapabable of intellectually fathoming or accepting at this time.

Interesting, but to me that runs back to the "we're too lazy" argument...which isn't really an argument, but an apology. You may not be meaning for this in your statement...

Though I think that we may be expressing it in different ways, I stand with Claverhouse on the issue. I'll embrace atheism when God finally runs out of patience and keep my attention focused on what wonders the future holds. :sombrero:

[Ckyzxr]

I have concluded that religion is borne from the need for humans to explain those things which we have not yet learned or are incapabable of intellectually fathoming or accepting at this time.

Interesting, but that runs back to the "we're too lazy" argument...which isn't really an argument, but an apology.

I think I'm misunderstood...
Those things that we cannot fathom or understand are outside the range of all human intellectual progress to this point. Our brains do not have the ability to grasp the concepts or humans just haven't figured it out yet. The statement was meant to encompass the entire human experience, otherwise it's worse than an apology or laziness, it's ignorance.

[s]

It seems to me if you are an INTP, you will eventually become agnostic.

Is there no place for religion in a perceiving personality type? It's an interesting question.

For those who answer either yes or no, are they no longer perceivers? For those who decide not to answer and leave the matter open, does this make them judgers? :lol:

Judgers do not tend to leave matters open--that's for perceivers. Judgers like to come to a conclusion and move on.

INTP's, because of their perceiving, have the tendancy to keep options open and be comfortable with not coming to finite conclusions.

An INTP can be religious, but a true INTP will always continue to question, keep an open mind, and remain flexible.

I can easily see how someone could be somewhat agnostic and also choose to practice a religion, because of sentimental cultural ties, etc...

[CosmicDust]

Sometimes I seek certainty, if I get obsessed with a problem, but other times I'm too lazy to bother, or have given up after questioning the hell out of something and not managing to come up with an answer that continued to satisfy upon receiving new input.

With religion, I've nibbled at it from time to time and have not found conclusiveness on the God vs. No God matter forthcoming, but I have a leaning toward a Universe that at least doesn't have a theistic, humanoid parent-figure God. However, I have played with various spiritual ideas, and can see a sort of "God-concept" in the unity and harmony of the Universe...but I hesitate to call it God unless I put it in quotes, since God is such a loaded word.

[s]

I'm a little surprised in an INTP forum, that so many people are religous. It seems to me if you are an INTP, you will eventually become agnostic. In other words, there is no proof of God's existance or proof against God's existance. Sure it makes you feel better if there were this all-powerful being watching over us, but INTPs aren't feelers. Some like the idea of having closure on a question, but INTPs are percievers, not judgers.

It surprises me even more that a poll on an INTP forum about religious belief doesn't have the option agnostic.

I am in turn always a bit surprised when I hear such a response. [edit: Clarify: that there is no evidence for God. That even religious INTP's do not seem to have any proof]

While I have had some crises in faith (particulery after I have tried my faith against the best arguments of it's opposers) in general I have collected a fair amount of evidence that indicates that the God I worship really does exist.

I do not really have the time nor energy to explain it right now so perhaps I shall tell you what happend last time I explained it in a MSN conversation. Now the other person was a Christian INFP (I believe Jehova Witness) and after I explained he said that compared to Christianity my own religion was more based on gnostic. Where Christianity is based more on "mysteries" and "the Way of Love" mine was based more on the believer being guided by knowledge. Both self and other kind.

I agree with Ronbus and in Laeskis' "If you have a rational mind" thread, I elaborated on my reasoning in a few posts. INTP's are intuitive, but rational, so scientific analysis and synthesis, not raw feeling is the methodology that INTP's use in their quest for truth. Any "evidence" you or anyone has of God is circumstantial at best and therefore useless as proof. I am not arguing that GOD is NOT a possibility; I am instead acknowledging the limitations of modern science, technology, and human reasoning and mortality. There is not a definitive answer, therefore we are all just using educated guesses.

Though fascinated with world religions and having had my moments of tracendentalist spirituality, I have been essentially agnostic since I was 12 years old, despite my deeply religious background. I do not think it entirely impossible for someone to practice religion and still realize the possibilty there is not a god, gods, creator, divine force or whatever you want to call it.

Ronbus has an excellant grasp on how textbook INTP's think.

[Aryan]

I am an atheist
But i guess we can never know whether GOD exists or not

But i would like to think: Does GOD really want us to believe in him ?

[Aryan]

I read somewhere that most INTPs choose to put no opinion in the case of existence of God
Hmm...
This poll sounds interesting

[coffeezombie]

The biggest problem that I have with the existence of a God is that if God created us, then what created God? Is there a "super-God" over our own God, then? Maybe each planet with life has its own God?

[file cabinet]

I read somewhere that most INTPs choose to put no opinion in the case of existence of God
Hmm...
This poll sounds interesting

that'd be me.. ! I don't care if a god exists or not.. it seems so irrelevant

[file cabinet]

The biggest problem that I have with the existence of a God is that if God created us, then what created God? Is there a "super-God" over our own God, then? Maybe each planet with life has its own God?

god doesn't say...

just like he doesn't talk about the dinosaurs... shhhh

[heeroyuy]

My view of god consists of a multi-level idea. "God" is nothing but a word which we call a force who's origin is uncertain (this force may be natural, or it is possible that there is some being causing it). For example:

You have an anthill that you are standing by. An ant crawls out, and you take said ant and move him exactly 10 yards away. You do this in but a few seconds. This ant is concious, not how we would define it, but in its own way, it is. This ant comprehends it is somewhere else, far away, and that it would've taken a substantial amount of time to get there, but now it is here, in a very small amount of time.

Now; take that anthill and destroy it. Kick it over, trample it, kill the ants. The ants left only recognize the force, the action, not the actual cause. They recognize that the ant hill is now gone, ants are dead. They do not recognize anything more than this, because there is no way they could comprehend what a human being is, nor that there is a race of us. They could easily "say" (they're ants, I know, but the logic still works) that the cause was some super being which controls all life.

Now scale it up to humanity, and you get one of my many ideas of god. This is one of my personal favorites, and what I believe. But what I believe changes, so I reserve the right to change my opinion at a later time :)

[Claverhouse]

Is there something in the INTP Handbook about an obsession with ants ?



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Partisan]

Philosophy over religion. That's me.

Amen Jeebus.

Here, I simply question the existence of Godhead. I haven't made up my mind, and probably never will, which is fine for me, but not for most everyone else. Although it is wickedly fun to deabte! :devil:

I do, however, practice Buddhism as a lifestyle. Not for spiritualism, just for happiness. I think Siddhartha was on to something, but not so close as to be destroyed by Vogon ships.

[Merkaba]

"Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence." RAW

[Partisan]

Hit the nail on the head Merkaba.

[Johnny]

Is there something in the INTP Handbook about an obsession with ants ?

:rofl:

If there was, it has probably been superceded by now...

:sombrero:

[Fujikanaeda]

I read somewhere that most INTPs choose to put no opinion in the case of existence of God


I would tend to believe this is very true. An INTP is the type of person that likes to distance themselves from choosing sides. So therefore, it would make sense for INTPs to stand the middle ground in religious debates, often being devils advocates against the most brash participants, or staying quiet all together. Being one way or the other takes the INTP's objectivity away.

[t]

i've never known what to think with religion. i reject organized religion because i feel it's too confining and i question too much about it. however, there's a part of me that feels there's some sort of higher power - be it a god or something completely different. i've sat up thinking way too many nights about this.

sometimes i think that the higher power is simply another realm that we can't see or touch... and it crosses over and interferes with ours from time to time. it's really not a "higher power" persay, but an existance that is always there on the same level as us, but we just can't perceive it with the naked eye & the basic senses that humans are conditioned to use. this is how i explain ghosts. but hey, it's just a theory. i have no scientific basis for it. it's the result of sleepless nights and things i've heard here & there.

then i wonder if there is a basic human need to have faith in something. i can't seem to just say i'm an atheist because i think i want to believe in a god, but i can't stop questioning whether or not i believe in it. therefore if i have to give myself a title, i suppose it'd be agnostic because that doesn't confine me to any one belief (or does it?).

[Mealz]

This thread is certainly food for thought!

I am certain there is a God and my logic tells me that. I do also believe that all humans have a need for God, although many keep themselves busy to avoid admiting it to themselves.

If there is no God there is no explantion for our existence. Since our universe is so infinitely complex, it is impossible that we could have evolved.
With my small knowledge of maths (probability) along with the law of entropy I can rule out evolution altogether.

A devine creator just makes sense to me. There are many truths that we cannot even begin to comprehend.

I see God creating us parrallel with us making robots with ai (on a much larger scale of course). We make robots that can think, but it is impossible for them to understand many of the concepts that we do. They only know what we program into them. Therefore from the observations of life on earth (which i think i am experiencing??) it is logical that God also made us intelligent beings but lacking the capabilites to fully understand many things. All our models and theories of reality are hardly scratching the surface of what is reality.

[file cabinet]

This thread is certainly food for thought!

I am certain there is a God and my logic tells me that. I do also believe that all humans have a need for God, although many keep themselves busy to avoid admiting it to themselves.

If there is no God there is no explantion for our existence. Since our universe is so infinitely complex, it is impossible that we could have evolved.
With my small knowledge of maths (probability) along with the law of entropy I can rule out evolution altogether.

A devine creator just makes sense to me. There are many truths that we cannot even begin to comprehend.

I see God creating us parrallel with us making robots with ai (on a much larger scale of course). We make robots that can think, but it is impossible for them to understand many of the concepts that we do. They only know what we program into them. Therefore from the observations of life on earth (which i think i am experiencing??) it is logical that God also made us intelligent beings but lacking the capabilites to fully understand many things. All our models and theories of reality are hardly scratching the surface of what is reality.

there most certainly could be a god but it seems unnecessary to worship the 'creator' if he did exist.. but I guess it gives some people purpose.

we live in a petri dish called earth.

[atypical]

Being new to this forum, i'm not exactly sure what the ettiquite is. I'd love to point out, one-by-one, the flaws in Mealz' post (and others), but... would that make me captain obvious to most other people in the forum? is this thread neither the time nor the place?

I myself am an atheist, since I think agnosticism is too strong a claim and I couldn't be bothered defending a such a pro-active belief, having spent most of my life defending christianity (i lost my faith a year ago). Just for some clarity, an atheist is someone who doesn't believe that god exists, *not* someone who does believe that god doesn't exist. Big difference you know...

[file cabinet]

Being new to this forum, i'm not exactly sure what the ettiquite is. I'd love to point out, one-by-one, the flaws in Mealz' post (and others), but... would that make me captain obvious to most other people in the forum? is this thread neither the time nor the place?

I myself am an atheist, since I think agnosticism is too strong a claim and I couldn't be bothered defending a such a pro-active belief, having spent most of my life defending christianity (i lost my faith a year ago). Just for some clarity, an atheist is someone who doesn't believe that god exists, *not* someone who does believe that god doesn't exist. Big difference you know...

I am curious as to what reasons led you to lose your 'faith' ? I was raised to believe there was a god.. but one day I thought to myself, could I live for a day without believing a god existed? I did live that day...

this is probably the `ideal` forum to discuss religion:
http://www.intpcentral.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=20

[Groty]

I was raised non-denominational christian. Used to go to this freaky religious summer resort with my aunt and uncle every summer. Wierd place.

Anyways...

I remember what led me down the road to atheism, made me question religion. One night, I was 9 years old and at that camp, my Aunt woke me up. Asked me if I had ask Jesus to be my savior, because if I hadn't, I was going to HELL!


Ta hell with that!

[atypical]

I am curious as to what reasons led you to lose your 'faith' ? I was raised to believe there was a god.. but one day I thought to myself, could I live for a day without believing a god existed? I did live that day...

Yep, thats just about it. I was tired of being guilty for masturbating and looking up porn, and one day i'd had enough and decided to try out being an atheist, and found that it was amazingly liberating (Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try... no wonder I hated that song so much as a christian!) I've looked back a few times, but only when I was really tired and mentally vulnerable. A little sleep always got me back into my right mind.

As far as you putting 'faith' in quotation marks, that's unneccesary. I was quite full-on with my christianity - one of those turn-every-conversation-into-an-opportunity-to-preach types. I'd had a few "spiritual" experiences with the "holy spirit" on christian arts camps - in one such experience i was reduced to a crying, trembling wreck for a good 20 minutes (the most profound joy i've ever experienced), and for quite a long time after that nothing could have possibly convinced me that my faith was unjustified. For a few years, I even belived all that creationist tripe.

I have few regrets for my time as a chrisitian, it was neccesary to get me to where I am now. It does kinda suck that I had to become an antisocial fundamentalist monster before finding my way out, but.. oh well. At least now I know enough about all the arguments to be able to reduce any christian to tears...

[PsiKik]

I remember what led me down the road to atheism, made me question religion. One night, I was 9 years old and at that camp, my Aunt woke me up. Asked me if I had ask Jesus to be my savior, because if I hadn't, I was going to HELL!
!
When I was about 12 the implication of Hell/believing really was terrifying me. I spent months really scared/worried. Logically it seemed I was hell bound as the preachers would point out that very few made it to heaven.
I think religion is like a mind virus that had made me ill, eventually my mind 'healed' itself. Now a practicing atheist.

[Claverhouse]

I was tired of being guilty for masturbating and looking up porn, and one day i'd had enough and decided to try out being an atheist, and found that it was amazingly liberating

Who can say that atheism doesn't have inspirational stories to rival those of the Saints ?


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[mindbender]

Religion = spoonfed bullshit. No thanks.

[headfonez]

Religion = spoonfed bullshit. No thanks.
Do you "believe" that?

[mindbender]

By what connotation do you mean believe?

Do have faith in that? No. I look at the facts.

[headfonez]

Oh. You believe the facts.

[Star Cannon]

Here's a question: what is the 'bull' and what are the facts?

I remember when I was around 8 or 9, I was... concerned about the questions of heaven and Hell. I can't recall much. I remember winning a banner contest, I drew the major chronological events of the entire history of the old testament. Everything seemed to lead up to the Christ.

Then after a while I just stopped worry about it and went on with life. I went into my anti-religion phase.
But now that I think about it, wasn't the message of Christ that of enlightenment? That every human could aspire to his level if they followed his examples?

Oh well. I'm not going to worry about it. If I ever become Pope (unlikely), I'm gonna do so much reforming it'll make the Church's head spin.

[panda]

But now that I think about it, wasn't the message of Christ that of enlightenment? That every human could aspire to his level if they followed his examples?
I wish that sort of thinking was the norm among Christians. Unfortunately, a certain kind of intolerant, Protestant fundamentalism seems to be taking over, at least in America.

[C.J.Woolf]

But now that I think about it, wasn't the message of Christ that of enlightenment? That every human could aspire to his level if they followed his examples?
Some of the books cited in Elaine Pagels' The Gnostic Gospels sound positively Buddhist.

[nomir_dva]

Oh. You believe the facts.

Everything (except my self-awareness) requires some level of 'faith.' Some things are just less likely to be delusions than others.

[panda]

Everything (except my self-awareness) requires some level of 'faith.' Some things are just less likely to be delusions than others.
I agree. I think that was actually the point headfonez was trying to make, though.

[abathur]

Christianity is a social system designed around a book. If you read the book, you'll see all KINDS of conflicts with what many Christian sects teach. Jesus spent a fair amount of time railing on the exact types of people filling church pews today professing his greatness.

Were Jesus to come again today under a new guise and say what he said two thousand years ago in up-to-date english I'm fairly confident that a large majority of Christianity at current would reject him. He wasn't crucified for being controlling, manipulative and dogmatic--he was crucified for calling religious institutions out for the hypocrites they were, and are.

[One]

I am a christian and have been for the past 3 years. I love living my life as a person with faith. I wouldn't have it any other way...

[Dman]

I am a christian and have been for the past 3 years. I love living my life as a person with faith. I wouldn't have it any other way...

Curious, what were you before that (4 years ago)?

Broader question, what makes people believe in one religion over another? Why Christian and not Jewish, or Muslim, or Buddhist, or ? Does one just “feel” right more than the others, or seem more logical, or does it depend upon who convinced you or your upbringing? I don’t get it. Which is part of the reason I don’t subscribe to any of them.

They all say the others are wrong, and theirs is the only “right” one, well for Christ’s sake (haha) somebody has to be wrong


Oh yeah, and there’s a fine line between atheism and agnosticism, and I believe agnosticism is more appropriate personally (agnosticism – the logical choice ;) )

a•the•ism P Pronunciation Key ( th - z m)
n.
1.
a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
2. Godlessness; immorality.


ag•nos•ti•cism P Pronunciation Key ( g-n s t -s z m)
n.
1. The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact knowledge.
2. The belief that there can be no proof either that God exists or that God does not exist.

[panda]

Curious, what were you before that (4 years ago)?

Broader question, what makes people believe in one religion over another? Why Christian and not Jewish, or Muslim, or Buddhist, or ? Does one just “feel” right more than the others, or seem more logical, or does it depend upon who convinced you or your upbringing? I don’t get it. Which is part of the reason I don’t subscribe to any of them.

They all say the others are wrong, and theirs is the only “right” one, well for Christ’s sake (haha) somebody has to be wrong


Oh yeah, and there’s a fine line between atheism and agnosticism, and I believe agnosticism is more appropriate personally (agnosticism – the logical choice ;) )

a•the•ism P Pronunciation Key ( th - z m)
n.
1.
a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
2. Godlessness; immorality.


ag•nos•ti•cism P Pronunciation Key ( g-n s t -s z m)
n.
1. The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact knowledge.
2. The belief that there can be no proof either that God exists or that God does not exist.
I'm agnostic. I'm also Buddhist. For me, everything about (Zen) Buddhism just sort of "clicked". At its core, there's no dogma, no unsupportable beliefs, just practical advice concerning ways to decrease suffering and increase happiness. There aren't any "commandments". You're encouraged to critically examine everything, and reject those things which don't make sense. Buddhism doesn't teach that it's the "one true way". It doesn't condemn other religions. You don't worship any god. And most importantly, it works (for me). In fact, I'm somewhat reserved about calling it a religion due to the negative connotations. For me, it's a way of viewing things which leads to a deeper understanding of one's self, and an increased sense of well-being and happiness.

I was raised Christian. I was something of a fundamentalist zealot during my teenage years *shudder*. I always had a strong interest in Zen, though. Then, around the age of 17, I suddenly realized how irrational my Christian beliefs were, and I became a rabid atheist. It wasn't very pleasant for my family to say the least. The "strong" atheism in me gradually wore out, and was replaced by a laid-back agnosticism. It was actually only recently that I took another look at Buddhism. This time, (due to being free of my Christian beliefs), I was able to critically and honestly examine it. I liked what I saw.

Anyway, that's my super-condensed autobiography in the area of religion.

[Ivy]

They all say the others are wrong, and theirs is the only “right” one, well for Christ’s sake (haha) somebody has to be wrong.

They all say that? Wow. I had no idea I thought everyone was wrong but me and Pat Robertson. :whistle:

[Dman]

I'm agnostic. I'm also Buddhist. For me, everything about (Zen) Buddhism just sort of "clicked". At its core, there's no dogma, no unsupportable beliefs, just practical advice concerning ways to decrease suffering and increase happiness. There aren't any "commandments". You're encouraged to critically examine everything, and reject those things which don't make sense. Buddhism doesn't teach that it's the "one true way". It doesn't condemn other religions. You don't worship any god. And most importantly, it works (for me). In fact, I'm somewhat reserved about calling it a religion due to the negative connotations. For me, it's a way of viewing things which leads to a deeper understanding of one's self, and an increased sense of well-being and happiness.

I was raised Christian. I was something of a fundamentalist zealot during my teenage years *shudder*. I always had a strong interest in Zen, though. Then, around the age of 17, I suddenly realized how irrational my Christian beliefs were, and I became a rabid atheist. It wasn't very pleasant for my family to say the least. The "strong" atheism in me gradually wore out, and was replaced by a laid-back agnosticism. It was actually only recently that I took another look at Buddhism. This time, (due to being free of my Christian beliefs), I was able to critically and honestly examine it. I liked what I saw.

Anyway, that's my super-condensed autobiography in the area of religion.

Hmm, that sounds pretty cool. I’ll have to admit I don’t really know much about Buddhism. I shall do some research.

On a personal level, being raised an atheist, I have found my sense of spirituality going from absolutely zero to increasing interest as I get older. These days I actually think that the case for a “creator”, aka God, is stronger than the case without. I just don’t buy into the man-made aspects of religion; too hypocritical and self-serving. I see Islam, Christianity, and Judaism this way. Too much hocus-pocus. I believe firmly in evolution, science, logic, but do not rule out the possibility (probability?) that behind it all is a higher being.

And no, that kind of thinking does not belong in the science classroom.


“My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance -- but for us, not for God”
--Albert Einstein The Human Side, 1954

“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”
--Galileo Galilei

"I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."
--Albert Einstein

"The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being."
--Isaac Newton

(Referring to philosopher Rene Descartes) “Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences can we trust our senses and logical thought processes.”

[Wiki]

Spiritual. Meditation, prayer, forgiveness, reading the bible and other 'inspired' works outside of the canonized (dead sea scrolls, book of enoch, etc.).

I despise all religion, but not the people led by religion just the people doing the leading.

I respect agnostics and athiests. They rarely draw judgement on other people.

[headfonez]

believe in nothing = believing in nothing

[headfonez]

as far as religious practices go, its like a favorite color. either youll be into it or not.

[panda]

believe in nothing = believing in nothing
Thanks for that insightful breakdown.

[NoahFence]

I respect agnostics and athiests. They rarely draw judgement on other people.
That is quite untrue. A hefty chunk of the athiests I know instantly judge those who claim to be Christians as "sheep", "brainwashed", "oppressors", or "pathetically delusioned". Anything the Christian says is viewed through a filter of patronizing amusement at best, and is often discounted out of hand. They would claim "it's not being judgemental, it's true"...

[MaroonBells]

That is quite untrue. A hefty chunk of the athiests I know instantly judge those who claim to be Christians as "sheep", "brainwashed", "oppressors", or "pathetically delusioned". Anything the Christian says is viewed through a filter of patronizing amusement at best, and is often discounted out of hand. They would claim "it's not being judgemental, it's true"...

i would agree that i see all non-agnostics as "pathetically delusioned" but won't bother anyone with my opinion unless i'm preached at

[KuJo]

well, most christians tend to let their religion affect their decisions(as it should if they do believe) and critical thinking. let me give you an example, in western civ. class yesterday we had a discussion about natural law. The question was "do you believe in natural law AKA do people have natural rights or morals that we all our decisions are based upon." i said no, but almost everyone said yes, and most of the class said that god had given us these morals that are implanted in us. I asked them if a society devout of morals, god, or any religion would work, and not a damn person would answer my question. So I answered it for them, yes it could, because in order to survive people would eventually work together to keep living, whether or not god helped them. Everyone disagreed with my answer, and said that we cant think of a world without god. So there's one of the way religion has gotten in the way of critical thinking, and or thinking at all.

[meshou]

well, most christians tend to let their religion affect their decisions(as it should if they do believe) and critical thinking. let me give you an example, in western civ. class yesterday we had a discussion about natural law. The question was "do you believe in natural law AKA do people have natural rights or morals that we all our decisions are based upon." i said no, but almost everyone said yes, and most of the class said that god had given us these morals that are implanted in us. I asked them if a society devout of morals, god, or any religion would work, and not a damn person would answer my question. So I answered it for them, yes it could, because in order to survive people would eventually work together to keep living, whether or not god helped them. Everyone disagreed with my answer, and said that we cant think of a world without god. So there's one of the way religion has gotten in the way of critical thinking, and or thinking at all.Disagree with the morals part. Without at least the general idea you ought to help those weaker than you, and should not kill people for their posessions etc, no one would trust each other enough to risk being in a society. A society must at least have a code of honor in order to work.

My problem with the religion statement is a practical one. I can concieve of a society with no religion or spirituality, no rituals and no superstition. However, there is no record of one ever having existed or currently existing.

So it is possible in theory. But the fact that every society has had some belief in some diety or spirituality seems to suggest it does not happen, and is a very strong drive in a good chunk of humanity.

[mgb]

well, most christians tend to let their religion affect their decisions(as it should if they do believe) and critical thinking. let me give you an example, in western civ. class yesterday we had a discussion about natural law. The question was "do you believe in natural law AKA do people have natural rights or morals that we all our decisions are based upon." i said no, but almost everyone said yes, and most of the class said that god had given us these morals that are implanted in us. I asked them if a society devout of morals, god, or any religion would work, and not a damn person would answer my question. So I answered it for them, yes it could, because in order to survive people would eventually work together to keep living, whether or not god helped them. Everyone disagreed with my answer, and said that we cant think of a world without god. So there's one of the way religion has gotten in the way of critical thinking, and or thinking at all.

I agree with meshou.

Morals will develop when you put any group of people together. You'd be pretty hard pressed to come up with an example of a morally devoid society that functioned on any level.

[Ivy]

well, most christians tend to let their religion affect their decisions(as it should if they do believe) and critical thinking. let me give you an example, in western civ. class yesterday we had a discussion about natural law. The question was "do you believe in natural law AKA do people have natural rights or morals that we all our decisions are based upon." i said no, but almost everyone said yes, and most of the class said that god had given us these morals that are implanted in us. I asked them if a society devout of morals, god, or any religion would work, and not a damn person would answer my question. So I answered it for them, yes it could, because in order to survive people would eventually work together to keep living, whether or not god helped them. Everyone disagreed with my answer, and said that we cant think of a world without god. So there's one of the way religion has gotten in the way of critical thinking, and or thinking at all.

But you're not judgmental about religious people. Gotcha. :)

Maybe it's a part of being a J, but I make a partition between my set of knowledge and my beliefs. Based on what we can KNOW, I think agnosticism (or, as someone recently convinced me, weak atheism, which is the lack of belief either in god or in no god-- distinct from but compatible with agnosticism) is the only logically defensible position. My beliefs, though, are seperate from that, because I don't think human logic is infallible and I don't presume that a diety would be bound by our rules of logic.

One question about your scenario that you presented to your class-- in your hypothetical society without morals, god, or religion, people eventually work together to keep living. Isn't that agreement that they form a kind of morality?

[KuJo]

Heres some more from that class-
I decided to make up my own caveman society, which i said were crazy and killed everything(i brought this up just to liven up the discussion :) ) and that the only reason they survived was because of an overbundance of women(which occured for no reason), which they ate half of and bred with the other half. I said they had no morals whatsoever and survived to evolve into the people we are today(i dont think they understood i was doing this jokingly). That didnt go over too well with anybody, mainly because i was talking out of my ass, but also because they thought that god had given all of us morals to begin with so that a society like the one i mentioned would never occur. I also brought up people who have done terrible things, and asked where their morals were, and either i didnt listen to the answer or they just didnt answer it, i dont remember, because if god gave us all morals then they should have them too.

They still wouldnt even make up a society without morals, they wouldnt even try! :mad:

[Ivy]

Heres some more from that class-
I decided to make up my own caveman society, which i said were crazy and killed everything(i brought this up just to liven up the discussion :) ) and that the only reason they survived was because of an overbundance of women(which occured for no reason), which they ate half of and bred with the other half. I said they had no morals whatsoever and survived to evolve into the people we are today(i dont think they understood i was doing this jokingly). That didnt go over too well with anybody, mainly because i was talking out of my ass, but also because they thought that god had given all of us morals to begin with so that a society like the one i mentioned would never occur. I also brought up people who have done terrible things, and asked where their morals were, and either i didnt listen to the answer or they just didnt answer it, i dont remember, because if god gave us all morals then they should have them too.

They still wouldnt even make up a society without morals, they wouldnt even try! :mad:

That isn't a society without morals, it's a society without OUR morals. Like you said before, those hypothetical cavemen would have some kind of social agreement about what was OK to do and what was not OK (can you eat or reproduce with your mother? a woman who belongs to your neighbor is off limits for eating but not for reproducing? whatever). Maybe we disagree about what morals are? What's your definition?

[KuJo]

a definition of morals is hard to define. Most assume that it correalates with good, but it can also be just a standard of conduct. but the point i was trying to make was a society without a standard definition, where moral judgement was put aside for logic where people did everything based on necessity.

[MacGuffin]

My beliefs, though, are seperate from that, because I don't think human logic is infallible and I don't presume that a diety would be bound by our rules of logic. It's alogical (http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=3087&highlight=alogical)!

[Ivy]

It's alogical (http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=3087&highlight=alogical)!

Score! Thanks! I know what I'll be reading in between diaper changes and books and bouncing the Tigger for the next couple of hours.

[MacGuffin]

Score! Thanks! I know what I'll be reading in between diaper changes and books and bouncing the Tigger for the next couple of hours.This one doesn't have alogical highlighted each instance:

http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=3087

[KuJo]

i cant read your posts since you got that clown avatar mac. All i do is look at it and wonder why you made it so damn big.

[Ivy]

This one doesn't have alogical highlighted each instance:

http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=3087

I was kind of digging that, actually. What would be even better is if every time it says "alogical," it was followed by a trademark sign.

Wish I'd been here for that discussion.

[MacGuffin]

I was kind of digging that, actually. What would be even better is if every time it says "alogical," it was followed by a trademark sign.

Wish I'd been here for that discussion.Check out the thread that spawned the alogical thread: http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=881

[Dman]

It's alogical (http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=3087&highlight=alogical)!

(begins sobbing)


Check out the thread that spawned the alogical thread: http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=881

(flat out bawling out loud now)

[MacGuffin]

;P

[pangolin]

That doesn't make sense to me. If I were omniscient, one would think I'd have the brains to get past such simple difficulties, right?


Actually, it has just occurred to me that the two cannot exist within the same effective entity. If a being were to know everything, it would be unable to make any choices, since it would have become identical with the process by which events proceed, in effect becoming all choices, and having none. That, I suppose, could count as omnipotence as well.

beings without all knowledge have jiggle room.

[pangolin]

I voted spiritual.

For the record, I presently label myself pantheist, which I view sort of as a scientific paganism. Its ultimately somewhat of a do-it-yourself philosophy, meaning there's not really any organized religious practices to it. Atheism vs. Theism is somewhat of an irrelevant scale. The world is here, we can try to learn about it what we can, and we can try to be ethical and foresighted when dealing with others and with our world. And we can take joy in the wonder of existence. All things are in some senses interconnected, and that works well enough to define spirituality.

[pangolin]

Why can't an ESFJ be an atheist or agnostic?

Because it would make other people uncomfortable if they were.
Unless, contrariwise, everyone were atheist or agnostic.

[Kilby]

Because it would make other people uncomfortable if they were.
Unless, contrariwise, everyone were atheist or agnostic.

Good post. It is amazing how many people I know who don't ponder their existence. They have been set in their ways from day one, fitting in with the majority. Without public opinion, would religion have caught on as it did? I think not. I remember the first time years ago, in a group of people, I brought up the possiblity that maybe things aren't what they think, and they all went crazy. I think I remember one of them calling me the anti-christ!

[Neppy]

I chose apatheist. Never actually heard that term before but I really do not have a strong opinion either way. Atheism is basically the same as religion - you put faith into the idea that there is no god, but really, you don't know. Nobody knows. They can only believe.

I've always liked the idea of there being a higher force, and that we have souls. It's a nice idea. I want to believe in it. And just yesterday I started thinking about birth and death. Why do we die? Is it simply to control overpopulation? Is mother nature really this intelligent? We don't have to die - but biology dictates that we must, because of the Hayflick Limit. Isn't it just strange that we're this intelligent? Maybe we're not intelligent at all. Compared to other, unknown life forms out there, we might seem like mere bacteria, multiplying without true purpose.

What about animals? Do they have souls? What makes the human race so special? I think this is why I tend to stay away from religious thoughts. It's overwhelming to consider. If there is a god, he (well, god might not be a gender, but hey) isn't the ideal many religious people expect him to be. He is objective, uncaring, uninvolved. Look at all the natural disasters that happen to kill millions of us. Acts of god, or merely unrelated geological incidents?

My personal opinion: God, to me, isn't a thinking entity. At least, if he thinks, it is beyond our realm of understanding. God doesn't care if you're lazy, or proud, or selfish. He doesn't care if you're charitable, humble and kind either. We're an accident, or an experiment. The conditions on Earth seem ideal to us because we adapted to live and grow in them. God is not a theistic being. He could be pure energy. Maybe that's what god is. Energy. God is powering my computer! He is in the food I eat! <_<

Another idea is that god is everything. He is in everything. He is existence itself.

Bloody 'ell... I don't know. I could spend my whole life wondering what god really is, and never truly know the answer. Maybe death will tell us. Maybe that's why we die.

[Apostasius]

Atheism is basically the same as religion - you put faith into the idea that there is no god, but really, you don't know. Nobody knows. They can only believe.

By that reasoning, one could also argue that agnosticism is the same as atheism or theism, because one can put faith into the idea that one cannot know if there is a god or not. But then again, like atheism, agnosticism has a couple different definitions or senses of the word.

http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/intro.html
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/sn-definitions.html

[ohnoaninfp]

I agree with meshou.

Morals will develop when you put any group of people together. You'd be pretty hard pressed to come up with an example of a morally devoid society that functioned on any level.
What about Las Vegas? :P

[ohnoaninfp]

I am Catholic and staying that way. I also keep an open mind though knowing, that not everyone shares my beliefs. :P

[jread]

Deist here.

[niall]

I'm a Christian and an INTP. It can be difficult at times because I like to understand things fully. But I've never understood my girlfriend fully, let alone myself so I figure that a paradigm built on pure rationality is limited (and yes, you could argue the reasons for this). Nevertheless, I see the harm in believing as no greater, if not lesser, than making a similar step of faith towards complete atheism and, if I'm wrong, its of no importance anyway. And, beyond that, my experience has been quite amazing through this journey. If its a delusion, its a damn good one.
I hope this is received as intended. Not trying to offend anyone, just feel compelled to note that I consider myself a thinker and yet somehow captivated.

[naruto littles helpers.jpeg]

I hope this is received as intended. Not trying to offend anyone, just feel compelled to note that I consider myself a thinker and yet somehow captivated.

well you're welcome here :wave:

and why should we care what anyone else thinks! our worldview is clearly the best. will enjoy bumpin into you here in this "wasteland"

[Samurai Drifter]

Agnostic, which would go under non-believer I'm guessing.

[nfinityi]

I'm one of those people who believes that there's something "bigger" out there, and that there's something very magical about living things, and the physical world altogether.

As for religions, I'm the kind of person that stands on the sidelines, observes the idiotic behavior, and says something to the effect of, "You guys are being stupid! Stop the petty squabbles!"

I guess you could translate that to Cartman saying, "Screw you guys, I'm going home!"

[HilbertSpace]

Atheism is basically the same as religion - you put faith into the idea that there is no god...


And bald is a hair color.

[nfinityi]

And bald is a hair color.
You can prove that someone has hair, and you can prove that someone does not have hair. You can't prove that there is a God, and you can't prove that there is not a God.

[Jennywocky]

I'm a Christian and an INTP. It can be difficult at times because I like to understand things fully. But I've never understood my girlfriend fully, let alone myself so I figure that a paradigm built on pure rationality is limited (and yes, you could argue the reasons for this). Nevertheless, I see the harm in believing as no greater, if not lesser, than making a similar step of faith towards complete atheism and, if I'm wrong, its of no importance anyway. And, beyond that, my experience has been quite amazing through this journey. If its a delusion, its a damn good one.
I hope this is received as intended. Not trying to offend anyone, just feel compelled to note that I consider myself a thinker and yet somehow captivated.

Thanks for posting and sharing, Niall, and welcome to the forums if you're new. I look forward to talking with you further later...

[HilbertSpace]

You can prove that someone has hair, and you can prove that someone does not have hair. You can't prove that there is a God, and you can't prove that there is not a God.

Ummm...

And you cannot prove that there are no pink unicorns. Yet it is a scientifically credible position to not believe in pink unicorns, because they don't fit in with things already incorporated.

[nfinityi]

Ummm...

And you cannot prove that there are no pink unicorns. Yet it is a scientifically credible position to not believe in pink unicorns, because they don't fit in with things already incorporated.
You're absolutely right.

Explain to me how existence... well, came to exist.

[HilbertSpace]

You're absolutely right.

Explain to me how existence... well, came to exist.

To paraphrase Fermat, I have a proof for this, but it is too large to fit in this post.

Seriously, though, cosmology is not my area, but I can say from the little I understand about it that it certainly seems to fit the facts better than the theistic model, at least as I see it.

The other problem with using this line of argument is that it is a God of the Gaps definition. It's theologically unstable because it requires God only as a sort of spackle to fill in the cracks in current knowledge - it doesn't make positive predictions.

[Krill]

And you cannot prove that there are no pink unicorns. Yet it is a scientifically credible position to not believe in pink unicorns, because they don't fit in with things already incorporated.

"Scientifically credible" in no way excludes anything from being faith based. In fact, relying on induction so much requires quite a bit of faith.

[nfinityi]

To paraphrase Fermat, I have a proof for this, but it is too large to fit in this post.

Seriously, though, cosmology is not my area, but I can say from the little I understand about it that it certainly seems to fit the facts better than the theistic model, at least as I see it.

The other problem with using this line of argument is that it is a God of the Gaps definition. It's theologically unstable because it requires God only as a sort of spackle to fill in the cracks in current knowledge - it doesn't make positive predictions.
I don't see it like that. And personally I don't believe in God in the Judeo-Christian sense, but I do believe that it's rather foolish to believe that everything can be explained in terms that humans can understand. IE- I think it's foolish to believe that there isn't something bigger out there. I don't know what it is, but to believe that from a small amount of unrelated knowledge, you can disprove any spiritual aspect of how all of this came into being, I think, is just plain ignorant.

[HilbertSpace]

I don't see it like that. And personally I don't believe in God in the Judeo-Christian sense, but I do believe that it's rather foolish to believe that everything can be explained in terms that humans can understand. IE- I think it's foolish to believe that there isn't something bigger out there. I don't know what it is, but to believe that from a small amount of unrelated knowledge, you can disprove any spiritual aspect of how all of this came into being, I think, is just plain ignorant.

And I fail to see how introducing a divine being simplifies the question at all. It makes it unimaginably harder, because now you have to explain His origin and properties. If you don't know enough to explain the origin of the Universe, introducing something you know even less about is just about the worst thing you can do.

[nfinityi]

And I fail to see how introducing a divine being simplifies the question at all. It makes it unimaginably harder, because now you have to explain His origin and properties. If you don't know enough to explain the origin of the Universe, introducing something you know even less about is just about the worst thing you can do.
Who said anything about spirituality simplifying things?

[HilbertSpace]

Who said anything about spirituality simplifying things?

Hmmm. That's entirely true. But we were talking about the validity of inference based on limited knowledge.

[nfinityi]

Hmmm. That's entirely true. But we were talking about the validity of inference based on limited knowledge.
What! When you put it that way you make religion and atheism sound exactly the same!

[Krill]

What! When you put it that way you make religion and atheism sound exactly the same!

Bravo!

(It appears that an ENFJ has just laid some smackdown)

[HilbertSpace]

What! When you put it that way you make religion and atheism sound exactly the same!

Someone is misunderstanding someone, but I'm not sure who, at the moment.

I was saying that, within the limits of logic and the scientific method of examining data and making a tentative acceptance or rejection of a proposal, it is reasonable to reject the proposal of God for several reasons relating directly to the lack of positive evidence, and that there is therefore no requirement to produce negative evidence.

[Krill]

I was saying that, within the limits of logic and the scientific method of examining data and making a tentative acceptance or rejection of a proposal, it is reasonable to reject the proposal of God for several reasons relating directly to the lack of positive evidence, and that there is therefore no requirement to produce negative evidence.

There is no misunderstanding. The atheist is inferring that God does not exist based upon limited knowledge because of certain epistemic standards which the atheist holds.

The theist is inferring that God does exist based upon limited knowledge because of certain other epistemic standards which the theist holds.

Both positions are as reasonable as each other, and both require the basic assumption of certain epistemic standards upon faith.

[HilbertSpace]

There is no misunderstanding. The atheist is inferring that God does not exist based upon limited knowledge because of certain epistemic standards which the atheist holds.

The theist is inferring that God does exist based upon limited knowledge because of certain other epistemic standards which the theist holds.

Both positions are as reasonable as each other, and both require the basic assumption of certain epistemic standards upon faith.

Would you attribute that to faith, or to a divergence in axiomatic foundations? Or do you regard the two as being equivalent?

[Krill]

Would you attribute that to faith, or to a divergence in axiomatic foundations? Or do you regard the two as being equivalent?

I regard them as being equivalent, at least in the manner in which I use faith within this context. While atheism might not be called a "religion" per say, it is most certainly faith based as it will rely an axiomatic foundations that are as lacking in justification as any religious axiomatic foundations.

[HilbertSpace]

I regard them as being equivalent, at least in the manner in which I use faith within this context. While atheism might not be called a "religion" per say, it is most certainly faith based as it will rely an axiomatic foundations that are as lacking in justification as any religious axiomatic foundations.

And this is because all axiomatic statements are themselves equivalent, insofar as they are axioms?

[Dark Razor]

I am atheist and I'm also actively opposed to organized religion, because it's only purpose is to extract money from their followers and to allow their leaders to accumulate enough power over the sheeple to further their twisted agenda.
Basically if you want power and money, just found a religion, you need to be good at deception and lying though.

[Krill]

And this is because all axiomatic statements are themselves equivalent, insofar as they are axioms?

Yes, in that they all lack justification in equal measure (have an absence of it).

[HilbertSpace]

Yes, in that they all lack justification in equal measure (have an absence of it).

I think that what you are saying is that it is impossible to invalidate any axiom, since axioms are, well, axiomatic.

However, if the axioms are meant to refer to an external system, does this still hold?

[Krill]

I think that what you are saying is that it is impossible to invalidate any axiom, since axioms are, well, axiomatic.

Well, what I'm trying to say is that one cannot (properly) validate an axiom.


However, if the axioms are meant to refer to an external system, does this still hold?

Could you clarify?

[stopharian]

Could we merge up some of these religious polls?

[mgb]

Could we merge up some of these religious polls?

Why?

[V Profane]

Why?

I can only imagine it's some kind of spring-cleaning fever.

[Battlecry]

I'd classify myself as a non-theist. I have explored many ideas of a "higher" intelligence, and the possibility of a creator. Non-religious, scientific deists or theists who equate the deity to an event such as the big bang are fine, as we have no concrete proof either way at this point. Any rational and objective hypothesis is alright for me. The concept of a deity in the context of the monotheist religions is gullible, though I don't entirely rule such out. I don't believe in anything per se, I see the world as possibilities and probabilities. There may be a chance such a deity exists, the probability is just so remotely minute that such is hardly worth considering.

I haven't had much experience with religious people or ideas until rather recently. For the most part, I find religious people to be irrational and have their whole strands of logic based upon one big presupposition. In my life, it's usually been ideologies, political-philosophies that and ideologies that I have had to deal with, such as the belief in natural rights, right-libertarian belief that the market is good and private property is a natural right, and various communist and Marxist beliefs and so forth. Such faith and belief in absolutes pertaining to such political-ideologies is, to me, the modern incarnation of the general publics appeal to emotion and provides them with absolutes to believe in. It was only until relatively recently did I realize organized religion, especially in the United States, was a big threat and force to be reckoned with.
I know a Christian fundamentalist personally, and have debated with him online on many occasions. While he attempts to be rational and pretends to be scientific, he cannot grasp the idea of subjectivity and the idea of a presupposition. Among the irrational things he claims, he says that we all know god by default, and stop believing in him. Additionally, his basis for belief are purely based on his emotions. He knows god exists because his life improved.
To me, people like this represent a major threat to the advancement, stability and sanity of our society. How such people can be allowed to live and hold such outrageous beliefs is beyond me. It's important to take into consideration what other people believe in, because people's philosophy, ideology or religion affect how they act in society and how they perceive the world, and thus their political views which ultimately affects the direction society takes.

[venerationOFrabbits]

Atheist.

I want to have 5 of Pat Condel's babies.

http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=patcondell&p=v

[shadow1986]

cool. only 12% of us are religuous. I bet a lot of that 12% isnt INTP :p.

Still... I dont like the idea that so many of us are spiritualists... Pretty pleased about everything else though :D

[shadow1986]

I am atheist and I'm also actively opposed to organized religion, because it's only purpose is to extract money from their followers and to allow their leaders to accumulate enough power over the sheeple to further their twisted agenda.
Basically if you want power and money, just found a religion, you need to be good at deception and lying though.

AND ITS ALL TAX FREE LADIES AND GENTLMEN!

[shadow1986]

There is no misunderstanding. The atheist is inferring that God does not exist based upon limited knowledge because of certain epistemic standards which the atheist holds.

The theist is inferring that God does exist based upon limited knowledge because of certain other epistemic standards which the theist holds.

Both positions are as reasonable as each other, and both require the basic assumption of certain epistemic standards upon faith.

If a moron came up to you and told you that an invisible man exists, the onus is on him to prove it so before either party starts accepting it as a truth.

It may very well be possible that the invisible man exists, but the onus should not be on you to disprove it. IF this were the case, anything and everything should be considered possible and true.

And yes, atheism is just another philosophy, like religion. But any rational atheist will admit THERE MAY WELL BE A GOD. He just won't believe in him until you prove it. And yes, you can say that his belief is in science. Well, the difference between the religious man and the atheist/agnostic is that the atheist follows the philosophy of science that says you shouldn't believe it until you have sufficient substantiating and scientific evidence to validate a claim. This is a far more rational standpoint.

[Chunes]

I take major issue with putting (somewhat religious) behind the 'spiritual' label, as though you're only doing it half-assed.

Intensity doesn't have much to do with method.