Do you consider yourself Atheist, Agnostic or Theist?

[hardrive]

Privacy Issue: THIS POLL IS PUBLIC! If you vote here, that will be visible for all other members and also visitors without TWC-account!
-> Click on on of the numbers that display the amount of votes for a specific answer (in the above "View Poll Results"-box). The members that voted for a specific answer will be shown below the answer that they voted for.


This poll is not about membership in a certain religious, spiritual, philosophical, ideological or whatever group or set of mind - or the not-affiliation to such.

The intent of this poll is to give us all a general overview of what the ethos community's metaphysical (in this context) orientation is; in a simplified and generalized manner though - as there are only five options to choose from (see "Note" below).


Procedure :
1.) please, VOTE! (>see privacy issue at post beginning)
2.) make a non-dissing and non-missionizing short statement (optional; and VERY WELCOMED!)
2b.) post a short reply to someone's post, that comments our statement (if existing; and if absolutely necessary)
3.) [nothing]


Note:
The way this poll is constructed and the limited and preselected variety of answers might be or are biased. (I myself am atheist for everyone to know.)
For example Catholics, Sunnis, some Hindu religion followers, Neo-Pagans or Shamanists might be offended to be pooled as one faction. And also people that consider themselves as non- or not Theists, Nihilstist, implicit or explicit Atheists etc. might feel uncomfortable to find themselves in the same category.
But it seems impossible to me, to make all sets of mind chooseable in a poll such as this. I could probably list 70 or more possibilities to vote for (10 christian, 10 muslim, 10 hindu, 5 buddhist, 20 polytheistic, animistic or shamanistic and 15 not-religious and not-theistic ...or any other composition); and even then the list would be incomplete.

PS: In general, and as only appeal > if possible don't diss or missionize in posts.

[mw2xboxplayer]

I would like to believe in a caring, benevolent God; but it contradicts with logic and reason.

[Squiggle]

A little distasteful to put myself in with animist but alrighty.

I would like to believe in a caring, benevolent God; but it contradicts with logic and reason.

Err...not to get off topic but look in the "why are you sceptical [...]" thread for a brief discussion on the coherence of Gods attributes.

[hardrive]

A little distasteful to put myself in with animist but alrighty.

True, but most others will also be a little upset to be thrown into one of the five groups for this poll.
But to clarify - not for you Squiggle, as you are treating this poll/thread the way it is meant; serious but not fanatical - this poll is about the general orientation and NOT about affiliation to a particular set of mind or religion or ideology. Veryone, or at least say 80-90% of folks, will have to make a compromise conerning their vote here. As stated in the "Note" (see #1 post) that's the way this poll works.

[black-dragon]

A little distasteful to put myself in with animist but alrighty. Err...not to get off topic but look in the "why are you sceptical [...]" thread for a brief discussion on the coherence of Gods attributes.

A great place to go for amateurish applications of Modal logic. Otherwise, I can't recommend it.

[Squiggle]

A great place to go for amateurish applications of Modal logic. Otherwise, I can't recommend it.

There was literally no applications of modal logic in that thread.

[black-dragon]

There was literally no applications of modal logic in that thread.

Oh, yes. I got it confused with the KCA thread. Still, all the obscure, logic-friendly formulations of God are alien to the one we have in mind.

This thread isn't about logic or modal logic, but about what people consider to be or not to be (in the context of the OP). If you wan't a discussion about this or that (issues not mentioned in the first post or poll), then go there or wherever.

He referred someone to a thread and I commented on it. Relax. I'm not derailing the fruitful discussion that's likely to follow from this religious roll-call.

[hardrive]

Oh, yes. I got it confused with the KCA thread. Still, all the obscure, logic-friendly formulations of God are alien to the one we have in mind.

He referred someone to a thread and I commented on it. Relax. I'm not derailing the fruitful discussion that's likely to follow from this religious roll-call.

As you stated yourself - this is simply the WRONG THREAD for that discussion.

1.) Vote > 2.) make a non-dissing or [EDIT: and] non-missionizing statement > 2b.) post a short reply to someones post commenting our post (without being dissing or missionizing) > 3.) [nothing]

Come on black-dragon: This is not a religious roll-call. And it's not meant to be a discussion thread (stupid assumption of course), but a poll with the opportunity to post a short statement.
Btw: I - the OP - am not religious, as stated in post #1.

[hardrive]

A great place to go for amateurish applications of Modal logic. Otherwise, I can't recommend it.

This thread isn't about logic or modal logic, but about what people consider to be or not to be (in the context of the OP). If you wan't a discussion about this or that (issues not mentioned in the first post or poll), then go there or wherever.

[Claudius Gothicus]

The agnostic and ''not too sure'' options should be merged since being an agnostic is basically not giving it enough time to think about it or just doubt.

[hardrive]

The agnostic and ''not too sure'' options should be merged since being an agnostic is basically not giving it enough time to think about it or just doubt.

I thought about Agnostics, Undefineds, Neutrals or none of the others to be simply that (= Agnostics, Undefineds, Neutrals or none of the others - surprise!)

And althought the "kind of" or "not that sure though" factions may in semantic or offical philosophical terms be nonsense, there are many reasonable people that are not decided (yet) or still in a process of opinion-making. Or they are simply not that sure, but for the moment lean towards a certain direction.

That said, I guess you would agree, it's fair and even necessary to have those categories?
I think those categories are vital for this poll; as it's supposed to be as non-polar [EDIT: meaning to be not only about Atheism vs. Judaistic Monotheisms, as mostly assumed or talked about here in Ethos] as possible.

Anyway - "unsureness can be a sign of wisdom and intelligence, whereas certitude can be the first sign of decay".

[Admiral Piett]

The agnostic and ''not too sure'' options should be merged since being an agnostic is basically not giving it enough time to think about it or just doubt.

That would be an oversimplification of agnosticism.

[hardrive]

That would be an oversimplification of agnosticism.

Right! And although your response breaches the prodecure stated in #1 post, which is:
- 1.) vote - (OK for you)
- 2.) state - (missed!!! -> VIOLATION!!)
- 3.) maybe reply

You are not disbanded for the TWC forum - for now! But your are hereby invoked to post a short non-dissing and non-missionizing statement that displays your "kind of... Atheistic / Don’t believe in supernatural entities / or similar - but not that sure" stand.
A short statement is sufficient! THX!

[Admiral Piett]

Right! And although your response breaches the prodecure stated in #1 post, which is:
- 1.) vote - (OK for you)
- 2.) state - (missed!!! -> VIOLATION!!)
- 3.) maybe reply

You are not disbanded for the TWC forum - for now! But your are hereby invoked to post a short non-dissing and non-missionizing statement that displays your "kind of... Atheistic / Don’t believe in supernatural entities / or similar - but not that sure" stand.
A short statement is sufficient! THX!

I wasn't responding to the OP, thus I was not in violation.

[Lord Rahl]

I'd almost consider myself a Deist but I chose neutral.

[hardrive]

I'd almost consider myself a Deist but I chose neutral.

Sadly I found it impossible, to make all kinds of views voteable as answers in the poll.

But you know how to handle this unavoidably inexplicit poll. And in general: nearly everyone will have to make some kind of comprimise regarding the vote.

[Lord Rahl]

The thing is I don't think about my spirituality very much so in that sense I'm neutral. It's not something that's a significant thing in my life. However, if I think about what I think makes sense to me then I tend to agree with Deism.

[hardrive]

The thing is I don't think about my spirituality very much so in that sense I'm neutral. It's not something that's a significant thing in my life. However, if I think about what I think makes sense to me then I tend to agree with Deism.

THX Lord Rahl!

btw: a good example of implementing and fullfilling the procedure in post #1.

[Taiji]

You have 3 options that are agnostic (the middle 3) and 2 options that aren't. Was that intentional or do you misunderstand agnosticism?

If it's intentional then what are you trying to discern from this survey where you trick people into admitting they are being agnostic?

[hardrive]

You have 3 options that are agnostic (the middle 3) and 2 options that aren't. Was that intentional or do you misunderstand agnosticism?

If it's intentional then what are you trying to discern from this survey where you trick people into admitting they are being agnostic?

There a 6 options (5 to vote for and 1 if not interested). The 2 options away from the middle (= the 2 "kind of.."s) are NOT agnostic. They are for voters that are wavering, consciously none of the other and don't wan't to commit themselfs to the other 3, or that simply don't regard themself as agnostic, theistc or atheistic but somewhere inbetween.

But you may be right, that the two "kind of..." options are neiter sematicaly, intellectually, philosophicaly or etc. correct. And by this or that definition they may be agnostic, but so what? But here they are as I put them up for vote. They are not agnostic for me anyway. There can be a set of mind inbetween agnostism and theistm/atheism as far as I am concerned.

But feel free to make a new definition that suits the 2 "kind of..." choises and be happy. (no offence meant)

Ancient quotation: "Mind and intellect may be the basis, but they or not all that is. Reason and doubt may show us unwalked ways to truth."