/lit/ - Literature

...And into agnosticism?
13.

23 I think? A thomist helped me too, OP

>>3671794
Hmm. Somewhere between the age of zero and never happened.

Science is the best explanation. An all powerful wizard who kills his son, or multiple gods who control the elements, make less sense than science. Mostly because we all know magic is fake.

>>3671804
But you can't prove it's wrong!!!!!1 Therefore, u are dumb

I was a late blommer. Early 20's and in my 30's I got proof

inb4 sky wiza-

Fuck.

>>3671806

Alternatively, I do quite enjoy a lot of the egyptian gods. Obviously its still bullshit but of all the gods, the egyptians actually had some ones that were interesting and well thought out.

>>3671796
most atheists are also agnostic

>>3671794
10-12ish? After some puerile existential phases.

Around 24.

I became an agnostic.

>>3671794
Would you be kind enough as to provide me ith the definition of atheism you're working with, OP? I want to make sure we're in the same frame

>>3671794
16. Now I'm purely marxist.

into Christianity? Never.
Into pantheism?
14.

Did Socrates, Plato and Aristotle seriously believe in the Greek gods? I mean there are myths of Zeus turning himself into a bull to rape a chick.

How can you ever take yourself seriously if your alpha god spends his time turning himself into a bull so he can fuck chicks in cow form.

21, though it was more of an ease from agnostic to agnostic atheism

>>3671808

What proof?

>>3671850
Of course they didn't. Plato suggested creating a fake state religion to keep the people in check, something very similar to the mythology of the time.

>>3671814
>masturbating the milky way into existence
>well thought-out

Are people here using agnosticism in the strict sense or in the 'actually you should probably just say atheism' sense?

Nigga I grew into it. I used to be an edgy christfag. I had some pretty cringe inducing moments too.

If you cannot answer the question, "Do you believe in a god?" as, "Yes," then you are an atheist.

In high school I was textbook edgy atheist. It ended quickly when I realized I couldn't make any worthwhile friends with it. Didn't turn Christian again but didn't really care if there was a god or not. Now I'm almost 20 and basically a pagan for the giggles, but I just act and tell everyone I'm a Lutheran.

>>3671848

Mah nigga

Reading Spinoza, and then a little sutra by Dogen called "Mountains and rivers sutra" really gives a whole new perspective on the 'Buddha-nature' business, that and Chalmers/Nagel/Mcginn on phil of mind.

>"Mountains and waters right now are the actualization of the ancient Buddha way. Each, abiding in its phenomenal expression, realizes completeness. Because mountains and waters have been active since before the Empty Eon, they are alive at this moment. Because they have been the self since before form arose they are emancipation realization." - Dogen

Buddha-dhatu=Deus siva Natura

Fucking A, those perennialists were right.

>>3671889
>It ended quickly when I realized I couldn't make any worthwhile friends with it.

dat intellectual integrity

I was kind of undecided. Then I got into the best university in my country thanks to based San Peter and the Holy Ghost.

>>3671850
He believed in the gods, but he didn't believe in any myths that portrayed them negatively or human.

>>3671794
>implying anyone needs to grow out of it just yet
Live a life of sin and good times, then repent on your deathbed just in case there is a God. Easy.

>>3671895
If there was a God they would know you were just doing that as a just-in-case type of thing, and that you didn't actually believe or repent.

>>3671863
Yes.

>>3671868

I dont know bout the rest of these fools but I'm legit agnostic, not agnostic atheist. I seriously believe intelligent design is a possibility. Some things are just so ridiculously ironic but so minor: the master of grotesque horror's last name is Lovecraft, for example. Tiny things like that happen enough and you start to wonder. Not convinced of anything though. My policy for now is: I don't know, and it's not important right now, but its interesting to talk about.

>>3671902
A fair point.

>>3671860
>>3671850

Socrates believed in his personal daemon and denied being an atheist in the apology

Plato posited an 'Absolute' god like entity in the Timaeus

Aristotle has the unmoved mover teleologically creating the universe

They aren't christian the christian God, but they are not exactly atheistic either

>>3671895
nah dog that only works if yr catholic. also god would know you still hold doubt in your heart, the only unforgivable sin in Christianity.

>>3671904
>the master of grotesque horror's last name is Lovecraft, for example.

>>3671904
>atheist Lovecraft's name is ironic, ergo god is real

>mfw mystics think there is even a remote possibility for supernatural entities to exist

Enjoy your delusions. Agnostics are the worst of the bunch; nothing but pathetic apologetics towards the nonsensical and half brain dead theists.

>>3671911
everyone holds doubt in their heart what the fuck

Also who made you a Christian master, this just looks like baseless conjecture to me. Please point to somewhere in the scriptures they say something remotely along these lines

>>3671911
>you still hold doubt in your heart, the only unforgivable sin in Christianity.

That's a very odd view as to what the "unforgivable sin" is.

>>3671919

#euphoric
#enlighten

>>3671794
16, realised utter disbelief in theism is equally foolish to utter belief

>>3671915

That was one example. Are you seriously going to try and tell me you've never noticed things that are so strange you think "how the fuck did that happen by accident?", and they happen just often enough that it feels like someones fucking with you?

>>3671921
>>3671922
Intredasting. Not that anon, but I generally assume that when Christians talk about the saving power of faith it has to be a 100% deal. Are there theologians who admit the possibility of being wrong?

>>3671930
they're called coincidences

What you don't notice and apparently tune out are the literally billions of things occurring everyday that don't line up in inane ways.

I will say that I recommend you watch Magnolia. Interesting film about coincidences and freak chances

>>3671804
>Muh science!
Philosophical athiesm is best athiesm, homo.

>>3671932
Does anyone know if this is actually him?

Never happened.

I don't believe denying several beliefs will make you smarter.

>>3671921
>baseless conjecture
>faith

okay dude. this is why talking about religious beliefs is often absurd.

>>3671922
okay yr right i meant denial.

>>3671930
What's so weird about Lovecraft's name being Lovecraft anyway?

>>3671937
Well, in the Bible, the "unforgivable sin" is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. This has to be reconciled with other parts of scripture that indicate that all sins are forgiven if one has faith and yadda yadda. So it is something that precludes faith. Opinions vary from it just being a lack of faith, or such a hardheaded reprobate way of thinking that one believes God to be evil and will not come to faith, etc. I don't think many theologians would say that 100% faith is necessary, though I don't think they would say that having less than 100% faith would be admitting you could be wrong. I think its more an acknowledgement of human frailty and weakness, and that we may doubt at times, and if that happens we should seek forgiveness for it.

>>3671942
I doubt that it is.

>>3671932
Dat syntax

19 into Agnosticism and 23 into Christianity.

>>3671932
>But because,

Why is it that when someone talks about how smart they think they are, they almost invariably make a grammatical or spelling error?

>>3671938

Alright true enough, I wasn't really trying to use coincidences as evidence anyway, just that sometimes it does SEEM like things happen for a reason. I don't believe that, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was true. Looks like an interesting film btw bout to check if its on netflix

>>3671796
>implying one can be just "agnostic"

Jesus Christ you people are ignorant.
You can be one of these things:
>Gnostic Theist
Believes in god's existence and claims knowledge of god's existence.
>Agnostic Theist
Believes in god's existence but does not claim knowledge of god's existence or nonexistence.
>Agnostic Atheist
Does not believe in god's existence but does not claim knowledge of god's existence or nonexistence.
>Gnostic Aheist
Does not believe in god's existence and claims knowledge of god's nonexistence.

Agnostic Theism and Gnostic Atheism are stupid unreasonable plebby places to stand. These are never ok.
Gnostic Theism is perfectly reasonable but ONLY if one has seen the hand of god.
Agnostic Atheism is the only reasonable answer in lieu of seeing god's hand.

That is why I am an Agnostic Atheist.

17, into buddhism
I still don't believe in a god, but I find the search or argument for it pointless

13

>>3671953

It really isn't all that interesting, just the first thing off the top of my head that seemed generally ironic. Ironic because his craft definitely is not love related. Also, I just remembered friend of my family is a proctologist with the last name Goodcolon. Seriously.

>>3671984

>17, into buddhism

You probably dont even practice half the fucking things a buddhist practices you fuck.

>>3671981
Isn't there also a separation in agnosticism between 'not claiming knowledge', as in your examples, and 'beliving that no such knowledge is possible'?

I had an existential crisis or something when I was 20 or so and became a Reformed Christian. Became an atheist again about a year or two later.

>>3671804
Absolutist faggot.
>lrn 2 perspectivism
>>3671939
>Philosophical atheism
I hope that was a joke, faggot.
Also, that band sucks.
And I was in that thread in /mu/, assuming that is where you got the picture.
I was the faggot insisting that Nietzsche died of a stroke caused by cadasil.

>>3671999
If you claim that, you are either an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist.
It depends on what you believe or don't believe.

>>3671998
ding ding
though I do try to meditate

>>3671996

The great thing about science is that its real even if you refuse to believe it.

I never grew out of Atheism because I was born in a Christian home, so Christianity was my default. I grew out of pussyfooting around on what I believed and became a Christian at around 16, never regretted a moment.

Just to start some conversation, what is the benefit of living in 'sin'. Not trying to assert some superiority, just interested as to why you would want to do >>3671895 that.

Hail eris, all hail discordia!

>>3672016
it's fun

>>3671996
>Black Sabbath sucks
Learn to be more subtle with your trolling, then people will actually believe you.
>implying I post on /mu/
The single was leaked today along with the cover art.

>he thinks you need to disprove a negative in order to achieve validity

>>3672020
[citation needed]
A lot of pain and difficulty comes from it, and the fun doesn't come from the sin, it comes from you.

>>3672033
I shoot up and it feels good, for me that's fun
are you actually suggesting fun is definite?

>>3671950
I'm saying that its baseless conjecture to make a claim about Christianity (you know something that actually EXISTS) that is entirely unfounded.

Keep up

>>3672010
Consider this:

>researcher finds something unique and ground-breaking
>peer-reviews
>everyone else fails to understand, considers the novelty an error, a stupidity, or a heresy
>no article published
>researcher runs out of funds
>back to being a lab-whore to some corporation that wants us to pay 200 dollars for a pill that costs 2 and doesn't heal us

Not to mention the drive for getting published in journals leads to lack of insight and diminishing returns. Nearly all the branches have been plucked free. Scientists are busy engaging themselves with ironing out existent knowledge in such a fashion as to lend themselves worthy of publishing. There is a similar, if larger, problem in the humanities, but it's definitely infecting the sciences more than the sciences are willing to acknowledge. There is a great deal of near-religious thinking going on.

>>3672037
That doesn't disprove my point one fucking bit.

It just proves that most people are ignorant.

>>3672035
I'm suggesting the opposite. I'm saying what is fun for one person is not fun for another. Fun comes from the mind, not from an action.
Not to be all "I DON'T NEED TO DRINK TO HAVE A GOOD TIME", but wouldn't it be better to find a way to have fun that isn't inherently damaging either yourself or others, as I think you could say shooting up would do.

>>3672010
Do you even Kuhn? Because the Earth was scientifically proven to be the center of the Universe for thousands of years, faggot.

17.

Thank you based Dostoyevsky and Kierkegaard.

>>3672037
what?

That example is much too abstract to be taken seriously. Are you saying the researchers experiment cannot be repeated? Why? Can he himself not repeat it?

>>3672046
No, YOU'RE ignorant. Science isn't 'true', ever. It's literally just the best guess we have at the time about the physical universe.

>>3672037
You are basing the faults of science on people who do not engage in it properly, not science itself. Religions by themselves are extremely problematic in their narrow view of the universe and science unlike religion evolves and never asserts anything without continuous testing and revising.

>>3672037
>back to being a lab-whore to some corporation that wants us to pay 200 dollars for a pill that costs 2 and doesn't heal us
>2013
>still thinking pills are overpriced

Big pharmaceutical companies spend billions on R+D and most of these treatments won't even reach the first stage of testing. Once they've discovered a pill that works obviously the price needs to reflect the entire cost (materials+research+testing) not just the materials

>>3672050
depends on what you find damaging
people call my excessive reading damaging

>>3672066
>2012
>Not realizing Big Pharma not only inflates prices but actively suppresses treatments that will lose them money, regardless of their efficacy
>ISHYGDDT

>>3672064

Also note that we have physical evidence of the things we believe to be real to exist. You're really just arguing the point of "But what if"? for the sake of arguing. Yes, there may be some all powerful fucking being. But really there has been no hard evidence that has proven science otherwise.

>>3672079
>Yes, there may be some all powerful fucking being.
not him but can you tell me why this matters

>>3672079
Read some Descartes of Hume.
There's really know such thing as 'phyiscal evidence', everything requires some sort of faith.

The massive patronizing atheism circlejerk is gross. This shitty against-the-grain anti-atheist internet subculture is just as bad.

You're all faggots.

>>3672079
The fact that anything exists isn't proof enough of some ultimate cause?

>>3671794
10, out of hate against religion in general
no signs of turning agnostic yet

>>3672074
go back to /pol/

>>3672090
you hated religion so you converted to one?

So, my belief is that any existence of a deity or upper being is irrelevant to any of my concerns, therefore I don't really care about any religious things. I just believe in living in a way that is simply following my personal rules of behavior and ethics; no worship jargon, just living how I feel is respectful to myself and others. What would I specifically be labeled as? P.S. I transitioned into this around Middle-school age

>>3672082

I really wonder what the hell most of you guys are trying to argue about in the first place. People have said that science has been wrong before. But thats not really a fault of it not being real, it's a fault of humanity not knowing what's real in the first place.

I'm sure the idea of quantum physics is utterly absurd to many people, and that certainly is a stretch when it comes to science. But theres quite enough hard evidence to disprove anything otherwise.

What am I even arguing about anymore? God damn this board fucking sucks. All you do is complain about someone not having taste in japanese literature and think that philosophy is more important than science. God I hate you all.

>>3672097
Stoics maybe?

>>3672100
Then leave and stop being a brood

God I've been samefagging on this thread ever since it started I need to fucking stop.

Fuck this board and fuck my inability to find something better to do.

>>3672100
>does not know science is a subset of philosophy.

>>3672100
No one here would argue that philosophy is 'more important' than science any more than they'd argue the opposite. The point is that science isn't enough to create a coherent world view you dumbass.

>>3672097
Apatheistic

>>3671794
Just grew out of it recently, after reading The Sparrow, actually. Fantastic book, I recommend it. I am 20. I do believe in God, but if he/it did create the universe then he's too large, too otherworldly, too full of energy to even be aware of human existence. He may interact with humanity passingly, but I don't think he really cares about our welfare overall.

21 maybe. i now have my own goddess designed around the concept of love and nurture. you should worship her

>>3672062

>not reading Dostoevsky and realizing that Christ-like love is achievable without an inherent belief in God.

Get a lot of this faggot.

If anything, The Brothers Karamazov only strengthened my disbelief in God.

>>3672096
totally, cause if atheism is a religion then not playing baseball is a sport

>>3672112
Looked it up. That is pretty much my viewpoint in a nutshell. I just feel like other people can have whatever belief they want if that makes them feel satisfied and fulfilled by doing their god's work, but I'm fine just existing peacefully.

>>3672083
Descartes is interesting in his arguments for God and what the physical world is but its all circular and based on things he can't prove. Hobbes puts it interestingly in Leviathan, by arguing that everything is physical and his argument while flawed makes the point that even your memories or imagination are physical elements in he universe (brain, neurons etc.) To say nothing is physical is asserting something you have no proof for. The physical universe is all we know.

>>3672122
*whoosh*

This thread is about growing OUT of atheism, you hopeless tool. Read OP again and then realize how dumb you are.

~15 - Deism
16-17 - first exposed to Sufism
18 - began serious study of major religions and their wisdom traditions
18-19 - first exposed to perennialist/traditionalist school concepts

Still studying a couple of years later.

>>3672100
wow way to completely miss the fucking point
why does a god existing matter?

>>3672122
Read the Op again champ

I'm not really religious, but it has good sides, so I don't renounce it.

>>3672133
well this is pretty much me except the perennialist stuff. I went straight into jewish mysticism, but most is inaccessible to English speakers

>>3672132
>>3672137
troll successful
have fun working at mcdonalds faggots

>>3672086
>>3672086
>>3672086
>>3672086

>>3671794
Anyone who converts from being a atheist to a theist is a sad person. I understand deism or agnosticism (which essentially most atheists are) but science is not compatible with religion. Maybe once the Christians revise the bible until nothing is left form the original texts i will agree that they are two things that can work together.

>>3672128
I never said nothing is physical? I'm not a solipsistic nutbag, I'm a spiritual nutbag. I believe that the physical universe is all we know but we can prove nothing of it. No utter 'Truth' can come from human understanding, because truth comes from above, an authority.
Also, proof is of no relevance, nothing can be proved, as I said, everything relies on faith in some way.

>>3672147
itwasallanelaborateruse.jpg

Growing out of rational thought... let's see.. 49 and not yet.

>>3672153
Science is only incompatible with religion if you the same exoteric understanding of religion as a 7 year old in Sunday School. Anyone who actually studies religion generally has a deeper understanding than that.

>>3671794
Never was an atheist. 24. I've been a firm believer my whole life. I was raised as a Jehovah's Witness (I never did get baptised), I don't really go to the "meetings" anymore, but I believe most of the doctrine. Either way, I'm open to most beliefs than most.

18, I suppose.

I don't believe in God in the Judaic sense, though.

>>3672143
>well this is pretty much me except the perennialist stuff. I went straight into jewish mysticism, but most is inaccessible to English speakers

Yeah, I've found that to be the case and don't know very much about Jewish mysticism as a result. I did something similar and started studying Arabic in order to delve deeper into Islamic esoterism/Sufism.

I was brought up strictly Catholic and it was hell. I don't think a lot of you edgy fools know what it's like on the inside. But there's nothing to be proud of in being a theist.

>>3672181
I was brought up strictly Catholic and it was great. I don't believe in God anymore but I still have a lot of respect and affection for the church.

>>3672181
>I was brought up strictly Catholic and it was hell. I don't think a lot of you edgy fools know what it's like on the inside.

My mother spent her entire childhood in Catholic schools and one of my good friends is a traditionalist Catholic who converted from Protestantism... it's really not that bad unless there's some secret doctrine or something I don't know about.

Ignosticism is the only way to go. If you think you NEED a conception of God to give your life meaning then you just aren't very resourceful as a spiritual thinker.

>>3672181
You can't blame Catholics for that. Try a different church maybe? But what it's really all about is Evangelism

>>3672157
If I agree with you that everything lies on faith due from our lack of perfection and knowledge I still feel like it wouldn't help religions or deists. Science would still come out as supreme in explaining the universe.

So basically lots of people brought up believing in a magic sky wizard try to find ways to keep believing in him even when they know better. Embarrassing.

>>3672184
I seriously doubt you were brought up "strictly" Catholic, but I'm glad you had a positive experience and weren't raped or anything. Always nice to hear religious success stories from the Western world.

>>3672190
This.
I became ignostic at age 20 and I haven't looked back.

>>3672197
Depends on what you're thinking of as 'strictly' I guess.

>>3672065
just to point out something that is already completely fucking obvious to anyone who has ever paid attention to atheists on the internet: people who criticize religion are really just criticizing the people who do it wrong.

If people did Christianity like a Jesus, you'd be all like "hey, here's what I think is right, and I think if you do it too you'll find you like it. I also think that thing you're doing is wrong, but you're perfectly free to do it if you want. Meanwhile me and my bros are gonna go do some good for society."

You could make fun of them for doing that based on funny beliefs, but there's literally no way you could make any kind of moral judgment on them. They'd be at least trying to help people who wanted their help, and thinking about what is true.

Once you get all the fucked-up shit out of religion that was put there by people doing it wrong, it really seems a shame that it will probably die out by the end of this century.

>>3672181
everything is shit

I can never tell how many of these posts are people trolling/samefagging.
I have some respect for the pantheists and the students of mysticism, but those of you saying you GREW OUT of atheism and INTO a major religion... What is wrong with you?

>>3672166
To believe in science and a intervening God (like him coming in the form of Jesus Christ) is contradictory. I find it funny that many religious see the old testament as metaphor because science and evidence from from anthropologists refute it so easily but still hang on to Jesus being the son of God. In many ways, fundamentalists are more sensible to me because people who cherry pick ideas in their holy books are not even committing to their faith. Have some commitment man!

>>3672191
>All religious people have the same highly anthropomorphized understanding of the Absolute that I had when I was 8

This assumption is why you and lots of other atheists are idiots.

>>3672215
You're right. But you can keep pointing out that you're right forever and these idiot fuckers will never listen or change their minds. Because they're open-minded and rational and dammit, they know it.

>>3672215
Your anger betrays your deep uncertainty.

>>3672210
If you're an ignostic then there isn't a belief system (or lack thereof) to be described as "shit." The question doesn't even warrant answering. And life just goes on until some major discovery provides the means to actually contact this cosmic entity instead of just speculate on it.

>>3672214
Who said I found the New Testament not to be metaphorical? What you don't understand is that none of it has to be literal truth to be true, man.

10->atheism
12->agnostic-atheist
13->pragmatic-agnostic
17->pantheist

>>3672215
A sizable chunk of America does have that same highly anthropomorphized understanding of the Absolute.

>>3672206

>Hey man, Jesus was just like this really chill dude who liked being a righteous bro to everybody. Trust me, I read some of the Bible in English. All of these Christians had it wrong from the beginning man. He probably wore flip flops and played hackey sack and ultimate frisbee just like me

This kind of crap grinds my gears.

>>3672225
Well, yes, but that's not a critique of religion as such, it's a critique of the fact that a lot of people are dumb assholes.

>>3672215
Whatever, you're still pulling your interpretation of the absolute out of your ass.

For anyone who has spent any time pursuing verifiable, demonstrable truth about something in the universe, for instance just the expression patterns of a single gene (a process that can take years of your life and still be incomplete), the notion that you can intuit the causal nature of the universe is beyond laughable - it's simply delusional.

Real Truth is *incredibly* difficult to ascertain and your brain will trick you again and again every step along the way.

But never mind, some addle-brained mystic in 1307 figured out the real answers, which have to do with a set of bronze age myths passed down by illiterate goat-herders. Makes sense.

>>3672222
>17->pantheist
And how to defend this position when asked to deliver proof for your claims?

>>3672229
it's interesting to me that your belief system seems to be deeply intertwined with reasons you think you're totally awesome.

>>3672229
Thank you for speaking some sense. These threads genuinely frighten me sometimes.

>>3672236
>These threads genuinely frighten me sometimes

lol

I was a devout Catholic until 16, then a year after turned deist, and another year has left me a pantheist.

>>3672233
Me? I'm nothing at all. I'm a semantic knot in my own cerebrum.

>>3672232
The fact that everything exists. 'God' isn't a personal, touchable, conceivable concept. Any concept you may construe as being what you think 'God' is, is a delusion.

>>3672238
It's not funny.

>>3672219
>none of it has to be literal truth to be true, man
So what is true then? Are saying you believe in the ideas(like Jesus' teachings or belief in God) found in the bible but not the stories? If you do, I would still argue that the morals and teachings are questionable.

>>3672249
It is pretty funny

>>3672247
Well your pantheism seems pretty closely related to atheism/agnosticism. Why don't you just go a step further and stop assuming things you can't prove? You really won't be changing the way you live in any meaningful way.

>>3672250
And you can argue that, but thankfully all of us have our own subjective morality, so that's all you or I can ever do is argue one way or the other.

>>3672256
wait, aren't you the Christian in this argument?

How the fuck are you going to talk about subjective morality?

>>3672255
>Implying you can't be an agnostic pantheist

>>3672258
But pantheism is like being a Jedi, right? I guess I don't understand what pantheism involves. Can you explain it?

>>3672260
Not him, but I always understood pantheism to be the belief that divinity is imminent in all reality.

>>3672260
God isn't a distinct figure. Everything a part of reality has divinity.

Around 15 years old. Took me a little longer than I would have liked.

>>3672181
>i had bad experiences, so all the experiences are bad

>>3672247

But that statement in and of itself is a statement that attempts to describe God.

Lvl Babby: Semi-practicing baptist
Lvl 2: Agnostic Atheist
Lvl 3: Agnostic Theist
Lvl 4: Panentheist

Feels bretty good

Spiro

>>3672279
Not really. You don't know what God is holistically because logically speaking you haven't experienced everything.

>>3672260
read Spinoza

>>3672260
>>3672284
Read Spinoza Ethics, but your head might not into it

>>3672212
>I have some respect for the pantheists and the students of mysticism, but those of you saying you GREW OUT of atheism and INTO a major religion... What is wrong with you?

Well, legitimate mystical practice takes place within the context of one of the major religions. It doesn't do away with religious rituals and symbols, it makes use of the esoteric significance that inheres in each of them.

>>3672225
>A sizable chunk of America does have that same highly anthropomorphized understanding of the Absolute.

The religious understanding of the masses and that of the saints are very, very different. Most "criticism of religion" is simply criticism of folk beliefs and assumptive faith.

>>3672229
>Whatever, you're still pulling your interpretation of the absolute out of your ass.

Modes of expression might change to fit different circumstances, but we never deviate from a doctrine which is essentially primordial. The 'make it up as you go along' approach is for new age charlatans and the nonreligious.

>Real Truth is *incredibly* difficult to ascertain and your brain will trick you again and again every step along the way.

'Real Truth' isn't ascertained using the same rational faculty you might employ in the study of, for instance, the expression patterns of a single gene.

>>3672282
l2 anthropology you starbucks drinking faggots

To all the pantheists in this thread.

How do you prove that everything are properties of God? Or rather, God is everything?

Never

>>3672301
>t. Most "criticism of religion" is simply criticism of folk beliefs and assumptive faith.

can't criticize esoteric interpretations because they inherently don't follow any logic at all, in fact they kind of pride themselves on being absurd

>>3672305

Did you seriously just ask how does one prove the ineffable?

..seriously?

>>3672305
Proof isn't an issue. The belief feels good, so they provoke a state of euphoria in themselves over it, so ipso facto god is everything.

You need more?

>>3672309
One must be able to reason for or justify their beliefs.

>>3672313
Then is their belief not based off faith but from euphoria?

>>3672305
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pantheism/#ArgForDriTowPan
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/neutral-monism/
http://capone.mtsu.edu/rbombard/RB/Spinoza/ethica-front.html

>>3672308

There are traditions of deliberate absurdity and sentimentalism within mysticism and esoterism (Zen koans, ecstatic/'drunken' Sufism, etc.) but there are also schools of thought that lay out 'schemata' of reality which try to give it rational expression. Either way the proof ultimately lies in direct experience, so you're right, conventional criticism is sort of pointless and most people either attempt to go along with it or reject it out of hand.

>>3672317
also, the arguments in the panpsychism article have a bearing here, because Spinozistic panentheism/classical pantheism is a form of panpsychism (God's attributes include extension and cogitatio)

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/#4

>>3672319
>. Either way the proof ultimately lies in direct experience

I don't understand how an experience can point to the existence of anything at all, other than the experience itself.

>>3672322
>I don't understand how an experience can point to the existence of anything at all, other than the experience itself.

The distinction between the subject and the object of the experience is supposed to collapse.

>>3672322
this can be argued from the intrinsic nature argument, see
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/#4.3

Schopenhauer argued for something like this for example. The basic idea is that we can't know the thing in itself by looking outside ourselves, only by looking inward, because our bodies are the only thing we experience as a subject and as an object at the same time.

>>3672324
>The distinction between the subject and the object of the experience is supposed to collapse.

Meaning you and God are identical?

Ok but experiences themselves have no identity. Identifying an experience as supernatural/transcendent/one with everything is arbitrary

>>3671794
While I'm still an atheist I technically believe in God due to my epistemological position in relation to the ability to create meaning from texts.

My hermeneutic circle rolls like that.

>>3672334
>Meaning you and God are identical?

You are a mode of God in Spinozistic terms, God/Nature is the whole. Another way to put it is that God is Natura naturans, nature naturing - the whole process, and the world is natura naturata, "Nature natured", or "Nature already created" - and you are only a part of that expression.

>>3672329
>only by looking inward, because our bodies are the only thing we experience as a subject and as an object at the same time.

Your body image/experience doesn't imply there is a body corresponding to that image/experience.