Neither theist nor atheist?

[ADigitalArtist]

someone who believes in a god - even in a non-interventionist god - is not someone who lacks belief in gods.

There are multiple definitions of theism in many theopogical circles (especially non english ones) today. Deism as asubset of theism makes no sense with the definition of theism which is *specifically* about interventional gods, not all gods. Which is why deism, and their branches like polydeism, pandeism and panendeism are usually called Nontheism which atheism is also a subset of. (Atheism and nontheism having different definitions through etymology, like the difference between gnosticism when talking about Christian gnosticism or gnosticism in opposition to agnosticism. The words are the same, the meaning isn't.)

 

[ADigitalArtist]

In order to be on the fence, you have to have a well established foundation for plausibility.

I consider agnostics as theists whom cannot make up their minds, given the fact there are no actual examples provided which can establish plausibility in any satisfactory way.

Agnostic atheists are also a thing the two terms represent two different questions. The former about knowledge, the latter about belief.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There are multiple definitions of theism in many theopogical circles (especially non english ones) today. Deism as asubset of theism makes no sense with the definition of theism which is *specifically* about interventional gods, not all gods. Which is why deism, and their branches like polydeism, pandeism and panendeism are usually called Nontheism which atheism is also a subset of.

Deism is not usually called nontheism.

(Atheism and nontheism having different definitions through etymology, like the difference between gnosticism when talking about Christian gnosticism or gnosticism in opposition to agnosticism. The words are the same, the meaning isn't.)

"Non-theism" is a euphemism for "atheism." Both terms are normally used to describe someone who is not a god-believer.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

There are multiple definitions of theism in many theopogical circles (especially non english ones) today. Deism as asubset of theism makes no sense with the definition of theism which is *specifically* about interventional gods, not all gods. Which is why deism, and their branches like polydeism, pandeism and panendeism are usually called Nontheism which atheism is also a subset of. (Atheism and nontheism having different definitions through etymology, like the difference between gnosticism when talking about Christian gnosticism or gnosticism in opposition to agnosticism. The words are the same, the meaning isn't.)

Deism is basically a reason why I can't consider myself an atheist. A creator of sorts really isn't an irrational belief - there very well could be one. But we don't know if there is one or not, and I do know we have a nasty habit to assume this creator is a god. But overall I don't accept or deny deism as a possibility. It could be, and would probably be the most likely to lead to a path that does eventually wind up at what would be a "god." But that is speculation. And speculations often have little use or purpose, especially when it comes to things where there is a lack of knowledge.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"Non-theism" is a euphemism for "atheism." Both terms are normally used to describe someone who is not a god-believer.

The definition has been changing. Though it originally was an effort to move away from atheist, which meant not only without god but also one who is immoral, today it has become more commonly used to describe those outside the atheist/theist dichotomy, especially for non-Western religions and philosophies which just do not fit into either label Literally, we'd say one thing (theist) to describe their traditional beliefs while they would use the other (atheist) to describe their views - as theist to them generally means monotheistic organized religion and they rarely use it to describe someone who isn't Abrahamic (in Japan, at least).

 

[columbus]

Deism is not usually called nontheism.



"Non-theism" is a euphemism for "atheism." Both terms are normally used to describe someone who is not a god-believer.

I am a self described deist.
Also a nontheist.
Thank you for not telling me what I believe.

To me, theism is about religion. Humans making claims about God and the afterlife and such. I think it's all fiction, created by humans for human purposes. Nontheists recognize that humans are pretty clueless, and latch onto some of the fiction for their own reasons. The reasons don't seem to have anything to do with objective reality.

Nontheists span the gamut from deists to igtheists to apatheists to agnostic theists to whatever. What we have in common is the realization that humans are rather clueless about some things, especially the divine.

You included. Sorry to lower your self esteem.
Tom

 

[Quintessence]

"I find the atheist/theist dichotomy to be useless" does not imply "I'm neither a theist nor an atheist.

Sure it does. If one rejects some particular dichotomous construct (regardless of what it is) it's likely that one doesn't identify with either dichotomous category. Not always, obviously, but often enough.

What would you say agnosticism is when it's "one's position in and of itself?"

Pure Agnostic = "I don't know" (no opinion)
Agnostic Theist = "I don't know, but I think there are gods"
Agnostic Atheist = "I don't know, but I think there are no gods"

There's nothing about apatheism that's incompatible with atheism.

I... didn't say there was? That one can be apatheist and either theist or atheist is kind of why it doesn't fall neatly into one camp or the other (rather like agnosticism).

Apatheist = "I don't really care about the gods question" (no opinion)
Apatheist Theist = "I don't really care about the gods question, but I think they are a thing"
Apatheist Atheist = "I don't really care about the gods question, but I don't think they are a thing"

I don't see how they defy the dichotomy. Pantheism and panentheism are both clearly subsets of theism.

I agree with that, but I respect that there are those who do not. I have met and spoken with pantheists and panentheists who are quite adamant about being "naturalistic" or "humanistic" varieties thereof. They're not uncommon within the Pagan community. See for example - Naturalism and Naturalistic Pantheism: can there be a naturalistic & scientific spirituality?

So

then an animist is a theist if they consider those non-human persons to be gods and an atheist otherwise.

As with pantheism and panentheism, it doesn't break down that neatly when you start talking to those who hold to such a perspective.

In any case, it's all just a category exercise at the end of the day anyway. Mainly has use for communication and purposes of study. The substance behind the labels is what matters most.

 

[metis]

Me: So do you believe in God?
Them: No, but I suppose it's possible.
Me: So you think there is no God?
Them: I suppose that's possible too.

See "My Faith Statement".

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Deism is not usually called nontheism.



"Non-theism" is a euphemism for "atheism." Both terms are normally used to describe someone who is not a god-believer.

Neither of these statements are essentially true. Deism was around as a non theistic category before atheism even became part of the vernacular. Atheism began as a slur against deists and became a category of deism before becoming a category of nontheism. Only very recently did atheism become opposed to theism in a binary choice by laymen. The definition of theism which is selectively used in opposition to deism is still the norm in many countries and contexts.
For all that you could assert deism is not non theistic I could assert it's not theistic.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I am a self described deist.
Also a nontheist.
Thank you for not telling me what I believe.

Deists are theists; deists are not non-theists.

There's only one thing a person can do that makes them not a non-theist: believe in a god. Deists do that, so they aren't non-theists.

To me, theism is about religion. Humans making claims about God and the afterlife and such.

There are atheistic religions. There are also religions that allow for both theism and atheism.

I think it's all fiction, created by humans for human purposes. Nontheists recognize that humans are pretty clueless, and latch onto some of the fiction for their own reasons. The reasons don't seem to have anything to do with objective reality.

Well, no. While I would like to think that a person could have a well-thought-out non-theistic worldview, there's nothing intrinsic to non-theism that suggests this is necessarily the case.

Nontheists span the gamut from deists to igtheists to apatheists to agnostic theists to whatever. What we have in common is the realization that humans are rather clueless about some things, especially the divine.

Again: no. The umbrella of non-theism includes some quite ridiculous - and IMO clueless - beliefs. What it doesn't include is belief in gods, e.g. deism.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Deism is basically a reason why I can't consider myself an atheist. A creator of sorts really isn't an irrational belief - there very well could be one. But we don't know if there is one or not, and I do know we have a nasty habit to assume this creator is a god. But overall I don't accept or deny deism as a possibility. It could be, and would probably be the most likely to lead to a path that does eventually wind up at what would be a "god." But that is speculation. And speculations often have little use or purpose, especially when it comes to things where there is a lack of knowledge.

I think my identifier still holds for me after all these years.
I don't know if gods are possible (agnostic) but I don't comport my life or beliefs as if they do (atheist) nor find much value in doing so (apatheist) in part because I don't believe 'gods' can be usefully defined in absolutes (ignostic).

 

[Hawkins]

Me: So do you believe in God?
Them: No, but I suppose it's possible.
Me: So you think there is no God?
Them: I suppose that's possible too.
?

You can actually substitute God with any historical figures existed long ago.

Me: So do you believe in Sun Tsu?
Them: No, but I suppose it's possible.
Me: So you think there is no Sun Tsu?
Them: I suppose that's possible too.?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Neither of these statements are essentially true. Deism was around as a non theistic category before atheism even became part of the vernacular. Atheism began as a slur against deists and became a category of deism before becoming a category of nontheism. Only very recently did atheism become opposed to theism in a binary choice by laymen. The definition of theism which is selectively used in opposition to deism is still the norm in many countries and contexts.
For all that you could assert deism is not non theistic I could assert it's not theistic.

Nontheism or non-theism is a range of both religious[1] and nonreligious[2] attitudes characterized by the absence of espoused belief in a God or gods. Nontheism has generally been used to describe apathy or silence towards the subject of God and differs from an antithetical, explicit atheism. Nontheism does not necessarily describe atheism or disbelief in God; it has been used as an umbrella term for summarizing various distinct and even mutually exclusive positions, such as agnosticism, ignosticism, ietsism, skepticism, pantheism, atheism, strong or positive atheism, implicit atheism, and apatheism.

Nontheism - Wikipedia



I think what you're calling "theism" in order to include deism within "non-theism" would be better described as "classical monotheism."

 

[columbus]

Deists are theists; deists are not non-theists.

There isn't much point in conversing with someone who believes that they know more about me than I do, now is there?
Tom

 

[Augustus]

The substance behind the labels is what matters most.

Don't be daft. Making sure everyone else accepts that my personal subjective preferences are right and theirs are wrong is what matters most

 

[Vinayaka]

Thanks to all who offered thoughts. I posted the question because I often see people posting that there are only two choices. That holds true for other discussions as well. But after reading the responses it seems to me that there are others, like me, that see alternatives besides those two strong positions.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I am an observer to the atheist/theist debate. From that and discussions with my parents many years ago when I was growing up, I don't see why there can't be a middle 'undecided' option. I don't see why it has to be one or the other.

In discussions with Mom or Dad when I was questioning life, the discussion would often go something like this.

Me: So do you believe in God?
Them: No, but I suppose it's possible.
Me: So you think there is no God?
Them: I suppose that's possible too.

These conversations were rare, because it simply wasn't a topic that was ever discussed unless some inquiring teenager brought it up. So is this officially agnosticism? Or is it just indifference to religion. Certainly to me it's neither atheism nor theism.

Thoughts?

When you asked Do You Believe and they responded No, they indicated that they are atheists, because they lack any belief in a god. That's ALL atheism is, a lack of belief. It is NOT an assertion that there ARE NO GODS. SOME atheists make such an assertion, but it is not required to be an atheist.

An agnostic is someone who looks at the evidence and says they don't know if they believe in any gods. Sometimes the evidence makes them feel as if there is and at other times the evidence seems lacking to them.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Nontheism - Wikipedia



I think what you're calling "theism" in order to include deism within "non-theism" would be better described as "classical monotheism."

Notice that pantheism exists on that page, even though you would omit it, as does deism if you go to Nontheistic religion - Wikipedia
Classical theism is a form of monotheism but it's also just theism. Where you are and what you're talking about will impact whether you emphasize classical theism or weak/strong atheism. But if someone calls themselves a non theistic pantheist or deist that makes perfect sense etymologically and theologically even if it's not American common use.

 

[Vinayaka]

When you asked Do You Believe and they responded No, they indicated that they are atheists, because they lack any belief in a god. That's ALL atheism is, a lack of belief. It is NOT an assertion that there ARE NO GODS. SOME atheists make such an assertion, but it is not required to be an atheist.

An agnostic is someone who looks at the evidence and says they don't know if they believe in any gods. Sometimes the evidence makes them feel as if there is and at other times the evidence seems lacking to them.

Read what I said. They didn't say 'no'. It was really more a 'Maybe.'

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There isn't much point in conversing with someone who believes that they know more about me than I do, now is there?
Tom

You're the one who said you were a deist, not me.