Poll: are you an atheist, theist or ?

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

I reject theism/deism/transtheism for being ridiculous and egoistical. I reject non-theism/atheism for being full of ridiculous and egoistical people. I also reject all forms of agnosticism for being indecisive and full of arrogant middle-of-the-road people.

Sounds like you reject people dude! Being ridiculous, egotistical, arrogant and indecisive is part of being human.
I used to be indecisive but now I'm not so sure...

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Sounds like you reject people dude! Being ridiculous, egotistical, arrogant and indecisive is part of being human.
I used to be indecisive but now I'm not so sure...

No, I reject -isms, as they are like dumb pills, and when people are on their effects they are ridiculous and egotistical.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

No, I reject -isms, as they are like dumb pills, and when people are on their effects they are ridiculous and egotistical.

Sure, I'm not big on labels, I don't lie awake at night worrying the label I've put on myself doesn't precisely describe all the detail of my beliefs. However, we need labels, it just saves a lot of time when we communicate. I don't really want people to tell me all their beliefs when we meet. Christian, Hindu, Deist, Atheist etc. is fine. If I want to drill down into the detail of their beliefs I will do so, if I think they have something interesting.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Sure, I'm not big on labels, I don't lie awake at night worrying the label I've put on myself doesn't precisely describe all the detail of my beliefs. However, we need labels, it just saves a lot of time when we communicate. I don't really want people to tell me all their beliefs when we meet. Christian, Hindu, Deist, Atheist etc. is fine. If I want to drill down into the detail of their beliefs I will do so, if I think they have something interesting.

"However, we need labels, it just saves a lot of time when we communicate."

I think you need to pay closer attention, as people love to waste time arguing over such labels. Saves more time my behind.

"I don't really want people to tell me all their beliefs when we meet."

Then don't.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

"However, we need labels, it just saves a lot of time when we communicate."

I think you need to pay closer attention, as people love to waste time arguing over such labels. Saves more time my behind.

Like you, wasting time on this thread about labels then?

"I don't really want people to tell me all their beliefs when we meet."

Then don't.

I think you may have got your wording wrong, that doesn't make sense. I don't ask people to tell me all their beliefs, but if we are going to have a conversation it is nice to have some short hand with which to express them correct? If you don't want to hear other peoples beliefs you seriously joined the wrong forum!

 

[Corvus]

Unrepentant strong atheist here. Simply put, I have no need for gods.

I am a high end number 6 in the Dawkins atheist scale. A De facto Atheist who believes the probability of God(s) existing is only slightly above zero. Have always been an atheist, for as long as I can remember considering the subject of religion and Gods.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I think your poll excludes Roman Catholics. It seems that Theism, Non-Theism and Trans-theism are so similar that its hard to differentiate them. In Roman Catholic theology, God is transcendent; so is God a theistic God or a trans-theistic God now? At the same time God is no God at all, because God has no limits, beginnings, or physicality; so then is God a non-theist God? If they choose non-theist, trans-theist or theist, then it seems like denying aspects of the trinity.

Deism is different in that it pretends to know whether or not the Deity interferes in human affairs. Atheism of the non-agnostic variety claims there cannot be a deity at all.

Quakers are eclectic, so there are various persuasions including atheists. That suggests a focus on trans-theism, however I'm not quite sure.

 

[Deidre]

I'm at a cross roads right now with all of this, but from those labels above, 'non-theism' would fit best. I'd say I'm coming back to the conclusion that identifying as an atheist might fit well for me, but still sorting my heart out. My mind has known for some time that religion and spirituality isn't really based on truths, but rather my desire for comfort and security. (in my opinion)

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS POLL please understand the normal, typical definition of whatever you put in the poll (you can change your vote if you make a mistake). For example if you believe in a traditional monotheistic deity please don't put transtheism which is way different from theism, and if you are a regular atheist please don't put nontheist (which is meant for someone who's not an atheist but also not a theist or deist and wouldn't fit under transtheism). Same goes for putting theism if say you don't believe in a personal or intervenening deity (which would actually be deism). See Edit 2 for some definitions!!!

So some time ago I made dual topics in the debate section:

theists attack atheism because they are insecure

Atheists attack religion* because they are ignorant

And the difference in reactions and participation, ratings on the two topics really made me wonder. My topic defending atheists was much more well received and more discussed, and I kind of felt given the responses that there might actually be more atheists here than theists.

So I wanted to make a poll to see a CURRENT reflection of the user base. The poll ends after 7 days, to best reflect this "snapshot" of active users.

Edit: I didn't put agnosticism as you can be an agnostic theist, or agnostic atheist ect. I also didn't put stuff like pantheism or panetheism because they (almost?) always fall into theistic and nontheistic variants. Just answer what "best" fits. I tried to be as broad as possible while covering the entire spectrum. I'm not aware of any other umbrella categories other than those 5.

Edit 2: To avoid confusion, some rough definitions for the purposes of this poll. Also all these have pages on Wikipedia if you hadn't come across any of the terms before:

Theism: You believe in a personal God or gods that divinely intervene or that use supernatural powers.
Deism: Your God is either impersonal or doesn't intervene. More of a clock maker type of deity that created the universe.
Transtheism: As defined by Paul Tillich or Zimmer. Described as beyond atheism and theism, so both nontheistic AND nonatheistic.
nontheism: a catch-all for non-atheist but non-theist/deist that are also not able to be described in Tillich's or Heinrich Zimmer's Transtheism.
Atheism: You do not believe in any God or gods, that they are not real but rather fictional.

I can't answer. I disagree with your definitions. By reasonable definitions of the terms, your categories overlap.

 

[Quintessence]

Well, keeping in mind I utterly reject the OP's definition of theism because it is way too biased towards monotheist/Western theology, I voted theist. Gods need not be personal, interventionist, or supernatural.

 

[LuisDantas]

Come to think of it, atheism may actually be less accurate than antitheism, transtheism or even nontheism for me.

I would call myself post-theist, but it is not like I ever was a theist...

But I don't particularly support the definitions used in the OP (no way I will specifically avoid or deny atheism), so atheist it is for the purposes of this poll.

That said, the wikipedia article on transtheism makes it appear that I am, in fact a transtheist. A very atheistic one.

 

[Corvus]

My mind has known for some time that religion and spirituality isn't really based on truths, but rather my desire for comfort and security. (in my opinion)

How refreshingly honest. Kudos to you.

 

[Desert Snake]

I'm at a cross roads right now with all of this, but from those labels above, 'non-theism' would fit best. I'd say I'm coming back to the conclusion that identifying as an atheist might fit well for me, but still sorting my heart out. My mind has known for some time that religion and spirituality isn't really based on truths, but rather my desire for comfort and security. (in my opinion)

Very intellectually high manner of description. Very well elucidated

 

[blü 2]

I don't know which box to tick.

My own view (sometimes called igtheism or ignosticism) is that the concept of 'God' and the concepts of similar words like 'supernatural'. 'spirit' &c are incoherent.

That is, I have no trouble imagining an imaginary god, since it can be anything I want, and if I change my mind, it can be something else.

But as for a real god, a god with objective existence, I'm stumped ─ what objective test will tell us whether some entity or phenomenon is a god or not?

The absence of such a test means that the word 'god' (or 'God' if you prefer) does not denote anything real (and that people who refer to real gods have no coherent concept of what they're talking about).

So if we want to talk about real gods, I can neither agree or disagree that they exist, since I too have no idea what we're actually talking about

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Like you, wasting time on this thread about labels then?
I think you may have got your wording wrong, that doesn't make sense. I don't ask people to tell me all their beliefs, but if we are going to have a conversation it is nice to have some short hand with which to express them correct? If you don't want to hear other peoples beliefs you seriously joined the wrong forum!

" I think you may have got your wording wrong, that doesn't make sense."

I did get the wording wrong, sorry about that.

"if we are going to have a conversation it is nice to have some short hand with which to express them correct? "

I disagree, as when people are auguring against ideas, they are not having a conversation with each other. They are talking towards each other but not to each other. Your "short-hand" leads to far too many misconceptions and it only muddies the conversational waters. People are more focused on what -ism someone is and debating that -ism than the actual person themselves.

"If you don't want to hear other peoples beliefs you seriously joined the wrong forum!"

I really don't care about other's beliefs, and I have actually said that a few times around here. I find the whole thing to be silly: Atheism, theism, all of it, it is just a bunch of nonsense. What I care about is how people came to their conclusion; what are their actual thoughts (something your "short-hand" skips right over). When it comes to religion that is so much more important than what their -ism is.

Too often people just look at the label and debate the label, and it is the reason I don't sport one, because I want people to talk to me and to not my labels.

 

[Aupmanyav]

A strong atheist and a religious and orthodox Hindu.

 

[Corvus]

I reject non-theism/atheism for being full of ridiculous and egoistical people

You mean people who know better than you?

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

I really don't care about other's beliefs, and I have actually said that a few times around here. I find the whole thing to be silly: Atheism, theism, all of it, it is just a bunch of nonsense. What I care about is how people came to their conclusion; what are their actual thoughts (something your "short-hand" skips right over). When it comes to religion that is so much more important than what their -ism is.

Fair play, beliefs are ten a penny, especially religious beliefs that don't really require much evidence for people to believe them. However, beliefs inform our actions, so it is in all our interests to understand what people believe. It helps to explain their behaviour. I actually find the beliefs of the people from the Eastern religions to be more interesting and layered than the Abrahamic religions, where the faithful tend to regurgitate doctrinal and theological beliefs they have been sold as part of the overall "package". They tend to surprise me more, and make me think more. Conversation is a two way road whoever I talk to, I like to think so at least.

What I meant about 'short hand terms' is that it saves us time getting to the meat of the belief. If someone says they are a Hindu I know it is pointless discussing Jesus with them because they don't believe in Jesus, it puts me in the right ball park. If someone says they are a deist then I know I'm talking to someone with a vague notion about a deity that takes little interest in his creations. The conversation can take a lot longer without labels!

Too often people just look at the label and debate the label, and it is the reason I don't sport one, because I want people to talk to me and to not my labels.

Sure, ditto, but I don't mind saying I am an atheist and a secular humanist. It helps other people understand where I'm coming from. They sometimes misunderstand what my views are based on that very brief description, but that's fine, I can explain in greater detail as the conversation develops. I never make an assumption about a religious label, if a person says "I'm a Christian" all that tells me is that they follow Jesus, but they could be a JW, a Mormon, a Moonie, a Catholic etc. However, at least it saves me time talking to them about the Quran for example! The label is the gateway into a deeper conversation.

 

[leibowde84]

FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS POLL please understand the normal, typical definition of whatever you put in the poll (you can change your vote if you make a mistake). For example if you believe in a traditional monotheistic deity please don't put transtheism which is way different from theism, and if you are a regular atheist please don't put nontheist (which is meant for someone who's not an atheist but also not a theist or deist and wouldn't fit under transtheism). Same goes for putting theism if say you don't believe in a personal or intervenening deity (which would actually be deism). See Edit 2 for some definitions!!!

So some time ago I made dual topics in the debate section:

theists attack atheism because they are insecure

Atheists attack religion* because they are ignorant

And the difference in reactions and participation, ratings on the two topics really made me wonder. My topic defending atheists was much more well received and more discussed, and I kind of felt given the responses that there might actually be more atheists here than theists.

So I wanted to make a poll to see a CURRENT reflection of the user base. The poll ends after 7 days, to best reflect this "snapshot" of active users.

Edit: I didn't put agnosticism as you can be an agnostic theist, or agnostic atheist ect. I also didn't put stuff like pantheism or panetheism because they (almost?) always fall into theistic and nontheistic variants. Just answer what "best" fits. I tried to be as broad as possible while covering the entire spectrum. I'm not aware of any other umbrella categories other than those 5.

Edit 2: To avoid confusion, some rough definitions for the purposes of this poll. Also all these have pages on Wikipedia if you hadn't come across any of the terms before:

Theism: You believe in a personal God or gods that divinely intervene or that use supernatural powers.
Deism: Your God is either impersonal or doesn't intervene. More of a clock maker type of deity that created the universe.
Transtheism: As defined by Paul Tillich or Zimmer. Described as beyond atheism and theism, so both nontheistic AND nonatheistic.
nontheism: a catch-all for non-atheist but non-theist/deist that are also not able to be described in Tillich's or Heinrich Zimmer's Transtheism.
Atheism: You do not believe in any God or gods, that they are not real but rather fictional.

I am confused by the meaning of your terms. Would "atheist" include those who merely lack belief in the existence of gods, but do not go so far as to believe that gods do not exist? For example, those who merely withhold belief due to lack of evidence either way.

 

[Ponder This]

I believe in God*.
I believe in gods.
I believe in fairies.
I believe in the supernatural.
I believe in angels.
I believe in Life After Death.
I believe in Reincarnation.
I reject the uninformed projection of reality created in the minds of others.
I reject idyllic, fantastic interpretations and misrepresentations of phenomena.
I reject cynical degradation and defamation of personal belief.
I reject tyrannical, oppressive dictation and projection.
I am content in the void of inaction
I allow the emptiness of non-thought to inform my mind.
I acknowledge the infinite, the incomprehensible, the mysterious, and the unknown.
Thank You!

*definition of god not included