Radorth

HQB will kindly move his accusations to the other link, so I can respond.

Rad

Stephen T-B

Blondegoddess, yesterday I reached a conclusion which I have mentioned elsewhere (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&postid=788820) and which may or may not be helpful to you. (It 's the seventh post in the thread.)
I now think people don’t “believe” or “disbelieve” in god. Some think there’s one (it’s what they’ve been told); some know for sure there is one; some don’t know for sure, and some know for sure there isn’t one.
I moved abruptly from thinking there was one (it’s what I’d been told) to thinking there probably wasn’t, and gradually from there to the certainty that there isn’t.
That last step does not necessarily follow from the second, but it is made possible because the mere fact you’ve entertained the possibility of god being a fiction means you have moved from dependence to independence.
It can take a while getting used to, and like many others here, I suggest you just give yourself time. It is a novel experience, and it can be a frightening one. But it is also wonderfully liberating.

HelenM

blondegoddess,

I have a mental health disorder and sometimes I have to step back and remember all the things that are going well in my life because I can easily get obsessed over one particular thing that isn't. But if I can step back, then I see that 'in the big picture', things are ok. And in your big picture, I hope things are ok for you too. Change is scary but you don't have to rush into it - you can take as much time as you need.

(I'm not suggesting you have a MHD - I'm just sharing one thing that works for me )

take care
Helen

edoggsmooth

For me, I think it was my family's emphasis on education that had a lot to do with it. Whenever I questioned something in the past (be it why did we have a civil war or why does it rain) I was always encouraged to figure it out using facts and reasonable thinking. Although with religion, it seemed like a dead-end; something I had to accept without any facts or thought. It seemed hypocritical, and in later years my parents have come to agree with me.

There are many other factors, both political and personal that also played a role at the start, but I think it was my emphasis on education that made the change to atheism so lasting.

-ed

southernhybrid

[QUOTE]Originally posted by blondegoddess
[B]I've considered some of these things. I was really looking into Wicca, but the more I studied it, the more I thought it was false. There are some concepts to it such as 'the All' that I like...

Have you read anything about pantheism. We have several atheist pantheists here at the II. You might find that philosophical view attractive.

I hope you're feeling better today. Now that you've told us you've been having doubts for eight years, it puts things in a different light. You must have felt very isolated and frustrated during that time. I hope that you at least feel a little less isolated since visiting our community.

Let me end by leaving you with a quotation from 19th Century freethinker, and feminist social reformer, Frances Wright:
I am not going to question your opinions. I am not going to meddle with your belief. I am not going to dictate to you mine. All that I say is, examine, inquire. Look into the nature of things. Search out the grounds of your opinions, the for and the against. Know why you believe, understand what you believe, and possess a reason for the faith that is in you.

That was written in 1828. American freethinking women have a proud heritage. Regardless of where your search leads you, you've demonstrated that you are an intelligent, freethinking woman. Be proud of that.

beth

Thank you Southernhybrid... I don't quite understand. How exactly can one be a pantheistic atheist? I thought that atheists believe in no god.

Bill

A friend from my home town is one of these people, although he just calls himself a pantheist because he prefers the "middle ground" between atheism and theism (and, of course, I keep trying to convert him to agnosticism ).

The idea of being (simultaneously) both a pantheist and an atheist really amounts to assigning two entirely different meanings to the word "god" simultaneously. The "atheist" defines "god" as something whose existence is at least uncertain (which gets into the distinction between "strong" and "weak" atheism). The pantheist defines "god" as the collection of everything which exists (or the "universe" if you define the word "universe" broadly enough so that the "universe" contains "god" rather than being distinct from "god").

Considerations such as these led 20th century philosophers like Ludwig Wittgenstein to observe that all philosophical "problems" are really "language games" that can be "dissolved" through linguistic analysis. Of course, Wittgenstein doesn't "solve" any of the classical philosophical "problems" (like "does the existence of the universe prove that some god must exist, or does that not necessarily follow?"). Instead, Wittgenstein shows that those problems cannot be solved, and thus are not real "problems" in the first place. They are instead confusions over exactly what is being spoken about.

Jim Still wrote an excellent essay on Wittgenstein and the basic problem of existence called "The Mental Discomfort of Why?" Its a rough read (but actually reading Wittgenstein is a LOT rougher), but if you can work your way through it, you will understand that a lot of what motivates people towards religion is the mental discomfort they experience when they confront "the problem of life." But "the problem of life," by its very nature, cannot be solved!

Religion, then, is a way of coping with this un-solvable problem. And the true diversity of religious views demonstrates the diversity of thought that the human mind can entertain.

So, getting back to pantheistic atheism, I would say that somebody who calls themseves a pantheistic atheist would be denying all of the traditional views of God (the Judeo-Christian-Islamic views in particular), and would be equating the word "god" with "the natural world" in all of its many facets rather than viewing "god" as a "separate entity" that exists somehow apart from "the natural world." But, as I said earlier, the term "pantheistic atheism" really embeds a confusion over the definition of the word "god." In my view, you are either one or the other: a pantheist or an atheist.

But my pantheist friend from California is welcome in any gathering of atheists I'm likely to attend.....

== Bill

beth

Thank you, Bill. I now understand. I am not sure whether I am an athiest or an agnostic. I'm trying to be open and explore options. As a friend advised me, I'm not going to jump in too fast and get locked into a belief. I do so appreciate the support, though. I wish I had come here years ago.

copernicus

Jobar has called himself a pantheist, and we've had discussions about this in the past. I have come to think of pantheism as an attempt to express the sense of awe or wonder that most of us feel when we ponder the universe. Richard Dawkins wrote a whole book--Unweaving the Rainbow--about the way atheists approach these feelings. I very much agree with Bill's insightful post on this subject. Pantheism is more of a tacit dispute about the use of the word "god" than a substantive issue that differentiates pantheists from atheists.

Bill

From the current Feature Article comes this interesting quote, that bears directly on the subject of pantheism: Wright was clearly a freethinker, and probably a pantheist that many would also call "atheist."

== Bill