Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 9:23 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Non-literal atheism?
#1
Non-literal atheism?
I'm a former atheist. I'm not a theist either. Not exactly sure what I am. All I know is I'm pretty damn spiritual. The answers to these questions should explain it.
Do ideas only exist in our imaginations? Or do we have the power to make ideas reality?
Is this planet ever going to grow rocket ships and spread life throughout the universe?
Are we or are we not the earths natural source for radically expanding creativity?
Is this radically expanding creativity sustainable without moral regulation?
Would you dismiss music as just meaningless sound waves? Is a painting just colorful grease on a sheet of cotton? Or are they art?
Would you say life is tasteless and without meaning? Or is life an art form? Do metaphors give art meaning?

Now that you've answered these questions, you may understand what I believe and why I believe it. I think spirituality may be too important to humanity to dismiss. It certainly shouldn't be mocked or ridiculed. It should be liberated from religion if anything.

I'm not really trying to have a debate here or convert everybody. I'd really just like to know what the hell my spiritual views could be classified as.
Reply
#2
RE: Non-literal atheism?
You aren't talking about atheism. You are talking about substance dualism, mixed in with a bit of woo.

You can be an atheist and have all the beliefs/interests you currently have. What you can't do is have an active belief that a sentient entity created the universe.
Reply
#3
RE: Non-literal atheism?
(August 17, 2014 at 1:10 am)bennyboy Wrote: You aren't talking about atheism. You are talking about substance dualism, mixed in with a bit of woo.
Aha! Substance Dualism fits the bill. Not exactly sure if I appreciate the implications of being called a "woo". I'm not a pseudo scientist.
Quote:You can be an atheist and have all the beliefs/interests you currently have. What you can't do is have an active belief that a sentient entity created the universe.
Check out my new signature.
god is supposed to be imaginary
Reply
#4
RE: Non-literal atheism?
I'm not sure I get your sig.

I'm not sure whether you are saying that god was never real because he was always imaginary, or
That god wasn't meant to be real, but somehow, he has become real?

cheers.
I agree with what you say and I don't consider myself spiritual.
No God, No fear.
Know God, Know fear.
Reply
#5
RE: Non-literal atheism?
(August 17, 2014 at 2:27 am)ignoramus Wrote: I'm not sure I get your sig.

I'm not sure whether you are saying that god was never real because he was always imaginary, or
That god wasn't meant to be real, but somehow, he has become real?
God always existed in my imagination even when I sincerely denied god's existence. Sure it may be a "god of the gaps" but I find it to be a constructive metaphor for the big picture of happenstance, that we reap the spoils of by existing.
Quote:cheers.
I agree with what you say and I don't consider myself spiritual.
That's good. I was just sort of summing up the meaning of life and mankind's higher purpose. So it's kind of a big deal. I tried discussing these things on reddit and got burned at the stake with sterile talking points.

When I talk about spirituality, you could use christmas spirit as a reference point. It's all metaphoric, with no literal value, but that doesn't mean metaphors have no value.
god is supposed to be imaginary
Reply
#6
RE: Non-literal atheism?
(August 17, 2014 at 1:32 am)stonedape Wrote: Aha! Substance Dualism fits the bill. Not exactly sure if I appreciate the implications of being called a "woo". I'm not a pseudo scientist.
Hah! A woo-less artist is no artist at all. You are a dealer in subtle impressions, not in absolute truths, methinks.
Reply
#7
RE: Non-literal atheism?
Quote:Hah! A woo-less artist is no artist at all.

I had to look up woo on rational wiki. It says plenty about pseudoscience, but it doesn't say anything about artists.
Quote: You are a dealer in subtle impressions, not in absolute truths, methinks.
Is that a bad thing? I can tell the two apart if that's your concern.
god is supposed to be imaginary
Reply
#8
RE: Non-literal atheism?
(August 17, 2014 at 7:11 am)stonedape Wrote:
Quote:Hah! A woo-less artist is no artist at all.

I had to look up woo on rational wiki. It says plenty about pseudoscience, but it doesn't say anything about artists.
Quote: You are a dealer in subtle impressions, not in absolute truths, methinks.
Is that a bad thing? I can tell the two apart if that's your concern.
To me, woo is any scientifically unsubstantiated idea-- karma, spirituality, feng shui, auras, etc. Basically, anything a hippie would be interested in. Stuff like "Are we or are we not the earths natural source for radically expanding creativity?"

I don't think there's anything bad about woo for artists. It's only bad if you think it's more than metaphor, and especially if you insist other people have to believe in the same stuff you do. But I don't think you're doing anything like that, so it's coo'.
Reply
#9
RE: Non-literal atheism?
(August 17, 2014 at 7:15 am)bennyboy Wrote: To me, woo is any scientifically unsubstantiated idea-- karma, spirituality, feng shui, auras, etc. Basically, anything a hippie would be interested in. Stuff like "Are we or are we not the earths natural source for radically expanding creativity?"

And they are very big on "vibrations".



You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.

Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.




 








Reply
#10
RE: Non-literal atheism?
(August 17, 2014 at 7:23 am)downbeatplumb Wrote:
(August 17, 2014 at 7:15 am)bennyboy Wrote: To me, woo is any scientifically unsubstantiated idea-- karma, spirituality, feng shui, auras, etc. Basically, anything a hippie would be interested in. Stuff like "Are we or are we not the earths natural source for radically expanding creativity?"

And they are very big on "vibrations".

Yeah, I think I get your drift, man!
No God, No fear.
Know God, Know fear.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Does the fact that many non-human animals have pituitary disprove Cartesian Dualism? FlatAssembler 36 1988 June 23, 2023 at 9:36 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Metaethics Part 1: Cognitivism/Non-cognitivism Disagreeable 24 1461 February 11, 2022 at 6:46 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  In Defense of a Non-Natural Moral Order Acrobat 84 6906 August 30, 2019 at 3:02 pm
Last Post: LastPoet
  The Philosophy of Mind: Zombies, "radical emergence" and evidence of non-experiential Edwardo Piet 82 11544 April 29, 2018 at 1:57 am
Last Post: bennyboy
  Non-existing objects KerimF 81 21411 June 28, 2017 at 2:34 am
Last Post: KerimF
  What philosophical evidence is there against believing in non-physical entities? joseph_ 150 12080 September 3, 2016 at 11:26 am
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  The difference between a sceptic and a non-sceptic robvalue 12 1904 May 20, 2016 at 2:55 pm
Last Post: robvalue
  God as a non-empirical being noctalla 39 5608 April 19, 2015 at 4:46 am
Last Post: robvalue
  On non-belief and the existence of God FallentoReason 72 13613 August 21, 2014 at 7:05 pm
Last Post: bennyboy
  Would non-domesticated animals go extinct if we all turned vegan? ideologue08 0 1378 May 19, 2013 at 7:42 am
Last Post: ideologue08



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)