What Type of Theist or Atheist are You?

[ynot]

Poll is worded wrongly .

So I've been told many times. Care to offer an example of how the poll could've been worded correctly? Or are you another drive-by critic.

However, based on facts available to me, there is no god.

Then what's wrong with voting "I know a god doesn't actually exist"?

Oh, I see you voted "I believe a god doesn't actually exist" anyway - Thanks

And, what's it to ya, anyway?

And, what's it to ya, to wanna know what's it to me, anyway?

 

[ynot]

Well, no. I always defended that, if we are to use the verb "to know" consistently, there's no reason not to say that I know a god doesn't exist, the same way I know many things don't or do exist (teapots, dragons, etc.)

But that depends on where you like to set the bar for "knowledge". I set the bar according to usage, not according to the idea of absolute knowledge many people seem to have in mind when this type of discussion arises. I'm more inclined towards epistemology than metaphysics, that is, I like to give the verb "to know" a practical usage.

Thanks. A refreshing post to read and agree with.

 

[Slowvehicle]

"It has been used as a figure of speech, in various phrasings, to describe someone's overly frequent and vehement attempts to convince others of some matter of which the opposite is true, thereby making themselves appear defensive and insincere." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_lady_doth_protest_too_much,_methinks

You are assuming facts not in evidence. Look it up...

 

[Pup]

Because it's not fair for me to criticize without also subjecting myself to criticism, and I was one of the first complainers on page 1, here's my suggestion for a list for everyone to pick apart. Can you find yourself on here? Are your friends and family there too? Does it hit or miss the high points of each category? Have at it and be brutal. This is just a pinata for fun.

A I can and do know that a god exists, based on current evidence or faith
B I don't think we can know whether all gods exist, but I have faith or evidence that at least one does
C I don't think we can know whether all gods exist, but I lack belief in every one I've heard of
D I can and do know that no god exists, based on current evidence or faith
E I don't care until you define god better
F I don't care at all, ever; it makes no difference
G On Planet X, I am God

I've omitted the difference in strong or weak agnostics, which one rarely sees specified. I have left out anti-theists, which would require two more categories based on weak and strong atheists, because I'm not sure they deserve a category any more than evangelical and non evangelical theists do. I didn't put in a special category for Navigator because he says he doesn't believe in any gods, which would put him in c, but he posts more like b, so one or the other should fit.

Just a warning, there will be repercussions for those who don't vote g, because I'm a jealous god.

 

[Thor 2]

A word of support for ynot. As I said before I think the wording was fine, and if you were to include all the other options the nit pickers here are suggesting, you would have a list of a hundred different options, making the whole exercise unworkable.

 

[Slowvehicle]

A word of support for ynot. As I said before I think the wording was fine, and if you were to include all the other options the nit pickers here are suggesting, you would have a list of a hundred different options, making the whole exercise unworkable.

The lumper's dilemma made flesh. It raises the issue of why bother trying to pigeonhole so diverse a group as atheists into categories.

 

[ynot]

Because it's not fair for me to criticize without also subjecting myself to criticism, and I was one of the first complainers on page 1, here's my suggestion for a list for everyone to pick apart. Can you find yourself on here? Are your friends and family there too? Does it hit or miss the high points of each category? Have at it and be brutal. This is just a pinata for fun.

A] I can and do know that a god exists, based on current evidence or faith
B I don't think we can know whether all gods exist, but I have faith or evidence that at least one does
C I don't think we can know whether all gods exist, but I lack belief in every one I've heard of
D I can and do know that no god exists, based on current evidence or faith
E I don't care until you define god better
F I don't care at all, ever; it makes no difference
G On Planet X, I am God

I've omitted the difference in strong or weak agnostics, which one rarely sees specified. I have left out anti-theists, which would require two more categories based on weak and strong atheists, because I'm not sure they deserve a category any more than evangelical and non evangelical theists do. I didn't put in a special category for Navigator because he says he doesn't believe in any gods, which would put him in c, but he posts more like b, so one or the other should fit.

Just a warning, there will be repercussions for those who don't vote g, because I'm a jealous god.

Thanks Pup

Here's my “at it” . . .

A I can and do know that a god exists, based on current evidence or faith Essentially the same as- “I know a god actually exists”.
I don't see that what the knowledge is based on is of any importance.
ETA – Unless you remove the “faith” then this is no different from B as it would be a claim to believe a god exists.

B I don't think we can know whether all gods exist, but I have faith or evidence that at least one does
Essentially the same as - “I believe a god actually exists”.
To be a theist you only have to believe in one god, so I don't see any reason to mention “all gods” and “one god”
ETA – Unless you remove the “evidence” then this is no different from A as it would be a claim to know a god exists.

C I don't think we can know whether all gods exist, but I lack belief in every one I've heard of
Essentially the same as - “I neither believe nor disbelieve a god actually exists”, which is essentially saying “I lack belief in a god and I lack disbelief in a god”. (some other's will vehemently disagree.)
Once again, I don't see any reason to mention “all gods” and “one god”.

D I can and do know that no god exists, based on current evidence or faith Essentially the same as - “I know a god doesn't actually exist”
Once again, I don't see that what the knowledge is based on is of any importance.
ETA – Unless you remove the “faith” then this is no different from a claim to believe a god doesn't exist.

Which reminds me, you don't have an option for those that believe a god doesn't exist. By far the most popular option in my poll.

E I don't care until you define god better
F I don't care at all, ever; it makes no difference
These two seem to represent attitudes of atheists rather than types.

G On Planet X, I am God
For entertainment purposes only .

Other than the last three (that I don't see as being actual poll options) your options are essentially the same as mine (with the ETA's corrected). If you disagree please explain the differences I've missed.

 

[ynot]

A word of support for ynot. As I said before I think the wording was fine, and if you were to include all the other options the nit pickers here are suggesting, you would have a list of a hundred different options, making the whole exercise unworkable.

Thanks. I don't mind the nit-pickers too much and they have to be expected when you're silly enough to post polls in a sceptical forum like this one. Good to see Pup has taken the time to contribute rather than just criticize

 

[Slowvehicle]

Because it's not fair for me to criticize without also subjecting myself to criticism, and I was one of the first complainers on page 1, here's my suggestion for a list for everyone to pick apart. Can you find yourself on here? Are your friends and family there too? Does it hit or miss the high points of each category? Have at it and be brutal. This is just a pinata for fun.

A I can and do know that a god exists, based on current evidence or faith
B I don't think we can know whether all gods exist, but I have faith or evidence that at least one does
C I don't think we can know whether all gods exist, but I lack belief in every one I've heard of
D I can and do know that no god exists, based on current evidence or faith
E I don't care until you define god better
F I don't care at all, ever; it makes no difference
G On Planet X, I am God

I've omitted the difference in strong or weak agnostics, which one rarely sees specified. I have left out anti-theists, which would require two more categories based on weak and strong atheists, because I'm not sure they deserve a category any more than evangelical and non evangelical theists do. I didn't put in a special category for Navigator because he says he doesn't believe in any gods, which would put him in c, but he posts more like b, so one or the other should fit.

Just a warning, there will be repercussions for those who don't vote g, because I'm a jealous god.

With all due respect, I do not see a category there in which I would feel accurate lumping myself, nor accepting being lumped.

 

[Pup]

Thanks Pup

Here's my “at it” . . .

A I can and do know that a god exists, based on current evidence or faith Essentially the same as- “I know a god actually exists”.
I don't see that what the knowledge is based on is of any importance.
ETA – Unless you remove the “faith” then this is no different from B as it would be a claim to believe a god exists.

B I don't think we can know whether all gods exist, but I have faith or evidence that at least one does
Essentially the same as - “I believe a god actually exists”.
To be a theist you only have to believe in one god, so I don't see any reason to mention “all gods” and “one god”
ETA – Unless you remove the “evidence” then this is no different from A as it would be a claim to know a god exists.

C I don't think we can know whether all gods exist, but I lack belief in every one I've heard of
Essentially the same as - “I neither believe nor disbelieve a god actually exists”, which is essentially saying “I lack belief in a god and I lack disbelief in a god”. (some other's will vehemently disagree.)
Once again, I don't see any reason to mention “all gods” and “one god”.

D I can and do know that no god exists, based on current evidence or faith Essentially the same as - “I know a god doesn't actually exist”
Once again, I don't see that what the knowledge is based on is of any importance.
ETA – Unless you remove the “faith” then this is no different from a claim to believe a god doesn't exist.

Which reminds me, you don't have an option for those that believe a god doesn't exist. By far the most popular option in my poll.

E I don't care until you define god better
F I don't care at all, ever; it makes no difference
These two seem to represent attitudes of atheists rather than types.

G On Planet X, I am God
For entertainment purposes only .

Other than the last three (that I don't see as being actual poll options) your options are essentially the same as mine (with the ETA's corrected). If you disagree please explain the differences I've missed.

Okay, let's remove "faith."

The last two are there to cover ignostics and apatheists. Are they maybe too small groups to split out?

I was trying to more clearly divide believe and knowledge. A-D each contain one aspect of each, so the middle two cover agnostics and the outer two cover gnostics.

Slowvehicle, do you see yourself in one of the four atheist/agnostic corners of the standard square, and I've got your corner described wrong? Or do you see yourself separate from that paradigm and therefore I've omitted your category by following that paradigm too closely?

Don't mean to beg for an answer if you'd rather not explain any further. Just asking, brother, can you paradigm?

 

[aleCcowaN]

The options are just Theist-Antitheist driven. Thinly veiled logical Manicheism.

Atheist type A - Can you run that by me again? (I only care to be evasive)
Atheist type B – I believe the god Empty Set actually exists
Atheist type C – I know the god Empty Set actually exists

That is basically what's being asked.

Oh, yeah! And the dictionary. 'Cause when I want to learn very well what justice, god, democracy, efficiency, contract and other thousand concepts are, I go to the dictionary (and to round up my phD, I go to Wikipedia ).

An the buzzwords and standardized comebacks: Yes, driven by criticism.

A poll on ideological matters designed by one sole individual is bound to reflect the worldview of such individual and not the whole range on the topic. Do you care to redesign the poll collectively?

 

[Slowvehicle]

<repectful snip for focus>

Slowvehicle, do you see yourself in one of the four atheist/agnostic corners of the standard square, and I've got your corner described wrong? Or do you see yourself separate from that paradigm and therefore I've omitted your category by following that paradigm too closely?

Don't mean to beg for an answer if you'd rather not explain any further. Just asking, brother, can you paradigm?

Full of win!
I am happy to try to explain:

Your "C" comes closest, right up to where you try to lump "lacking belief AND lacking disbelief" together, which I, personally, find a distraction.

I think that, if any (or all of the) 'gods' existed, that could be known (I am not agnostic).

As it is, I, personally, have never seen or heard tell of any actual evidence for the actual existence of any 'god' (of any kind). As such, I have no reason to believe in she/he/it/them/housecat.

I, personally, do not consider that "disbelief"--if pressed for a word, I would call it "unbelief". I, personally, do not find "lacking disbelief" to add anything usefully informative to "lacking belief"--it's kind of like "lacking not being a Man U. fan".

I, personally, consider that position, simply, atheism (a-theism, "without 'god' "). The epistemological/ontological discussions are fun, but they do not alter or inform the fact that I simply do not believe in any 'god' that has ever been peddled to me (despite my years in the pulpit).

Of course, actual evidence for the existence of any 'god' would lead me to reflection.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Okay, let's remove "faith."

The last two are there to cover ignostics and apatheists. Are they maybe too small groups to split out?

I was trying to more clearly divide believe and knowledge. A-D each contain one aspect of each, so the middle two cover agnostics and the outer two cover gnostics.

Slowvehicle, do you see yourself in one of the four atheist/agnostic corners of the standard square, and I've got your corner described wrong? Or do you see yourself separate from that paradigm and therefore I've omitted your category by following that paradigm too closely?

Don't mean to beg for an answer if you'd rather not explain any further. Just asking, brother, can you paradigm?

Ignostic should be its own category of each as well. Briefly:

Gnostic: we can and do know
Ignostic: we can know, but we don't
Agnostic: we can't know

"Agnostic atheism" as typically used lumps together the don't knows and the can't knows, and there's a pretty big epistemological gap between the two. Ignostic atheism should be brought out separately, and agnostic atheism and paired with agnostic theism. Which is, more or less, old fashioned Deism.

 

[David Mo]

Theism and atheism are only names. What matters is how we classify and define this names. This is to say, to identify the main options of a problem and to order them with clearly separate meanings. We need some criteria of classification to do this.

First criterion: to believe or not to believe.
To believe= subjective certainty.
(A) I believe in the existence of gods (one or several).
(B) I believe that gods doesn’t exist.
(C) I don’t believe neither A nor C. Suspension of judgment, for this moment at least.

Second criterion: to know or not to know; this is to say, to have reasons or not to have reasons for the A-C statements.
(a) I have some reasons to A, B or C. This will be some kind or rationalism (in the weak sense of the word)
(b) I have no reason to A, B or, C. This will be some kind of irrationalism.

All the possibilities are here in six possible combinations: Aa, Ab, Ba, etc. The problem usually comes when we give names to these options, because everybody has his particular terminology. This is the classical verbal discussion that ever arises when we are speaking of atheism and agnosticism. I am surprised that some people arrive to become angry with this.
Of course, the starting proposal in this thread was too shorter.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

A word of support for ynot. As I said before I think the wording was fine, and if you were to include all the other options the nit pickers here are suggesting, you would have a list of a hundred different options, making the whole exercise unworkable.

I attempted to formulate a poll just about atheists once, and gave up when I exceeded the number of poll questions just trying to describe the spectrum from atheist to agnostic.


I chose this list's Atheist type A, which is as close as he gets to the agnostic "heck, I dunno, and I'm pretty sure you don't either" perspective.

I describe myself as Deep Agnostic. On my way to the alarm every morning I'm pleased to discover Gravity is still working. I understand the basic science behind every thing and phenomena in the universe except one - why and how the universe exists in the first place.

 

[ynot]

“In the beginning” . . .

Some people believe and say that god(s) exist (Theist type A in my poll)

Some theists say they know god(s) exist (Theist type B in my poll)

Some people don't know about, or don't accept and adopt thesim, and are therefore not theists (Atheist type A in my poll)

Some atheists say they believe no god(s) exist (Atheist type B in my poll)

Some atheists say they know no god(s) exist (Atheist type C in my poll)

My poll is “What type ARE you”, not “What type might you become in the future”. I think the above options adequately cover the “are” options in relation to theism and atheism for a forum poll. Please provide any other relevant “are” options if you have any. Please don't be silly an offer any option like “Some atheists like sweetener in their beverage” as that has no relevance to theism and atheism.

I don't accep this is such an option . . .

Ignostic: we can know, but we don't

If we “can know” we would know. Perhaps you meant we might be able to know in the future? “Theist type B” and “ Atheist type C” cover the “We do know” options.

 

[ynot]

I attempted to formulate a poll just about atheists once, and gave up when I exceeded the number of poll questions just trying to describe the spectrum from atheist to agnostic.


I chose this list's Atheist type A, which is as close as he gets to the agnostic "heck, I dunno, and I'm pretty sure you don't either" perspective.

I describe myself as Deep Agnostic. On my way to the alarm every morning I'm pleased to discover Gravity is still working. I understand the basic science behind every thing and phenomena in the universe except one - why and how the universe exists in the first place.

<nit-pick> Well that's actually two

On what basis do you assume there even is a "why"?

Why don't you accept the "how" science currently offers?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

<nit-pick> Well that's actually two

On what basis do you assume there even is a "why"?

Why is a volcano? Because (to oversimplify) convection. Why is a universe?

Why don't you accept the "how" science currently offers?

It doesn't explain what happened before the Big Bang, what caused it, or where the mass/energy of the Big Bang came from.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Would it be reasonable to define supernatural along the lines of 'unobserved in nature' as opposed to not existing at all? Even subatomic particles are sometimes theorized without being observed

Were subatomic particles once thought to be supernatural?

Supernatural isn't just 'unobserved', it is incompatible with Nature. A god that is observed in Nature becomes a part of Nature and therefore is not supernatural - and not a god!

Let's say an alien visited and showed us how it had created our Universe - and had advanced technology that could perform all the miracles our gods are supposed to be capable of. Would it be a god, or just a highly advanced alien?

God isn't just 'unobserved in nature', He is impossible. I don't have to believe that impossible things don't exist - I know they don't.

 

[ynot]

Were subatomic particles once thought to be supernatural?

Supernatural isn't just 'unobserved', it is incompatible with Nature. A god that is observed in Nature becomes a part of Nature and therefore is not supernatural - and not a god!

Let's say an alien visited and showed us how it had created our Universe - and had advanced technology that could perform all the miracles our gods are supposed to be capable of. Would it be a god, or just a highly advanced alien?

God isn't just 'unobserved in nature', He is impossible. I don't have to believe that impossible things don't exist - I know they don't.

Good post