Atheism - Faith there's no god

OK so I can see what ren and Wescli are saying. There are gnostic atheists and agnostic atheists. Maybe the title of this thread should've been "Gnostic Atheism - Faith there's no god". I'll just figure most atheists are agnostic atheists.

@ren I don't know what you mean. I don't see how agnostic atheism and Jediism are inconsistent. There is nothing theistic in the totjo teachings that I'm aware of. A belief in the force can be agnostic or gnostic, depending upon user preferences. Also, if you believe the dark side is thought-perversion rather than supernatural, agnostic atheism has no inconsistencies at all with the temple doctrine.

Whyte Horse, I think Ren was saying that, as Jedi, we tend to believe that the Force is the highest power there is. If you are agnostic, you are saying that it is possible that a god is the highest power, though it is also possible that there are no gods or that gods are not the highest power. However, if you believe that a god might be the highest power, you can no longer believe with certainty that the Force is the highest power. Since Jedi typically believe in the Force as the highest power, the two contradict themselves.

Ren, if that isn't right, please correct me. That's how I understood your position.

Also on Ren's point, I would argue that it all depends on your definition of a god. I believe that all religions are manifestations of the Force. Some believe in a life energy, while others believe in actual gods that take a form and walk amongst the people, creating miracles and influencing events. Others believe in gods that have actual form but tend to stay out of events. Those religions that believe that their god or gods are somewhere "out there" waiting to be called on or needed are simply giving form to something that has no form. It is the easiest way for humans to understand the gods, so they have form. Those religions see their gods as literal beings.

I believe that the gods are all the same. They are everywhere all at once. They are all part of the life energy that many religions believe in and that we call the Force. Some people give shape to the Force while others do not, but they are all the same. Thus, I believe that the Force is the highest power while simultaneously believing that all gods are the highest powers because I do not see the difference between them. They are simply different names for the same thing, and sometimes they are given form because it is easier for humans to understand that way.

Whyte Horse, I think Ren was saying that, as Jedi, we tend to believe that the Force is the highest power there is. If you are agnostic, you are saying that it is possible that a god is the highest power, though it is also possible that there are no gods or that gods are not the highest power. However, if you believe that a god might be the highest power, you can no longer believe with certainty that the Force is the highest power. Since Jedi typically believe in the Force as the highest power, the two contradict themselves.

Ren, if that isn't right, please correct me. That's how I understood your position.

You understood

Also on Ren's point, I would argue that it all depends on your definition of a god.

That why I said the usual kind of theistic god. A god isn't necessarily the highest power (or everywhere, know it all, creator of the universe, etc), and that's actually pretty common in polytheistic faiths.

I don't think agnosticism excludes any particular kinds of deity, meaning that a true agnostics, imo, can never be a true Jedi. Because an agnostic, by definition, doesn't know, while a true Jedi wouldn't know except about the Force.

If you believe in one almighty thing (like the Force or a deity), can you still count as agnostic? If you look at christianity, its god/trinity and its angels, it's not so different from hinduism and its brahma, trinity, and other gods... Catholics pray to angels just like hindus pray to their gods...

Is a christian who believes in god and accepts there may be angels they do not know an agnostic? If not, then a Jedi who believes in the Force and accepts there may also be other beings (superior to ourselves) isn't an agnostic either...

As to whether gods are believed to be actual beings or more like facets of the same thing that just happens to be easier to understand... I suggest you read into the many sects of Hinduism... Interpretation of the same thing can lead people to polytheism, monotheism or atheism... Truly an interesting religion.

Ren, I will definitely do some research on Hinduism. Thank you.

I guess in my comment I was using the definition of agnosticism that Wescli provided:

Wescli Wardest wrote:
”A” means “without” and “gnosis” means “knowledge.” Hence, agnostic: without knowledge, but specifically without knowledge of gods.

[/quote]

So since gods are physical manifestations of the Force while the Force itself is an energy, I could see an agnostic who believed in the Force as an energy but was not sure if there were all-powerful physical manifestations of the Force (gods).

I'm in that place where I believe in the Force, and that things like God's are personification's of the Force within one's mind. As such I believe the Force can be represented by my mind as any manner of things under suitable circumstances. It could go both ways then, as deity worship then becomes personal spirituality and religious experience likewise is a personal spiritual experience. For me it leaves the door open to the possibility of external influence, without requiring it. This also gives me a tie-in to researching the psychological perspectives. So bringing in some acknowledgement of my limited ability to perceive beyond my physical senses, perhaps panentheism (not pantheism)?

Abhaya Budhil wrote: Ren, I will definitely do some research on Hinduism. Thank you.

I guess in my comment I was using the definition of agnosticism that Wescli provided:

Wescli Wardest wrote:
”A” means “without” and “gnosis” means “knowledge.” Hence, agnostic: without knowledge, but specifically without knowledge of gods.

So since gods are physical manifestations of the Force while the Force itself is an energy, I could see an agnostic who believed in the Force as an energy but was not sure if there were all-powerful physical manifestations of the Force (gods).

The problem is, this isn't a definition... It's the etymology.

In free dictionary: "1.
a. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something."

Wikipedia:"Agnosticism is the view that the existence or non-existence of any deity is unknown and possibly unknowable. More specifically, agnosticism is the view that the truth values of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, as well as other religious and metaphysical claims—are unknown and (so far as can be judged) unknowable."

Not quite the same I think...

since gods are physical manifestations of the Force while the Force itself is an energy, I could see an agnostic who believed in the Force as an energy but was not sure if there were all-powerful physical manifestations of the Force (gods)

But the physical world is a manifestation of the Force. If the god of pantheism counts as a deity, then so does the Force. After all, it's not clear what a deity is or isn't, but at least we can tell it can both be personal and impersonal. An impersonal deity that is ubiquitous is the Force. Something can't be everywhere if something else is already everywhere.

It is possible to know that your god does not exist.

bard wrote: Sorry... my last post is bugging me. I'm not aiming any vitriol at you, Whyte. I keep re-reading it and stressing.

I guess what I intended with my argument was... well, try this: replace each instance of the word God in your original post with Santa or the Tooth Fairy.

Santa is a corrupted legend based on the folklore of St. Nicholas, who we can prove existed. The Tooth Fairy is a corrupted legend based on multicultural accounts of fae, which (most likely) do not exist, except that the presence of them and their analogues in nearly every culture on the planet hints at some underlying cause, rational or imagined.

I don't find that either of these are good replacements for the "God" issue as presented.


Furthermore, why do theists and atheists alike demand that the existence of a god be an empirical issue? Why can't the existence of a god be purely philosophical?

Atheist: One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

That's all and ever will be. Nothing more or less. It is not a faith.

I have never meet anyone that actually claimed a gnostic atheism, though such a person might exist. In common usage atheism is used for a firmer assertion that there is no god, usually, but not always implying a general materialism. They claim that the lack of evidence for a god means that there is no point in considering its existence.

Agnostics on the other hand, in my experience, are more open philosophically, and make room in their mental model of reality for a god.

I see this as the difference. Whether they way they internally model of reality makes room for the possibility of a deity.