If an agnostic atheist doesn't believe in God solely because he or she cannot prove God's existence...

Question

and a spiritual atheist believe in mediums, incense, & meditation for spiritual guidance, than what the heck am I?

I always thought I was an agnostic atheist. The more I read, however, the more I realize that I do not believe one of the strong tenets of agnosticism - that I cannot prove the experience of a god or gods. This is not how I think. I am absolutely certain that there are no gods. Burden of proof doesn't even come into play. Different energies, yes, but no gods. I cannot prove the existence of Spiderman but I don't believe in him whatsoever because I know he doesn't exist because of logic and not burden of proof. I do believe in a collective, universal energy in nature that, far beyond the measure of science and mathematics.

What would this be called, if I was called on to explain my beliefs in an abbreviated fashion?

Thanks all! This would really help me out in regard to telling others who I am on a more spiritual level.

Answer 1

idk

you are a cult

this is religion here

Answer 2

Mind you, I'm an agnostic. What you'd call an "agnostic atheist." I think that what you describe as "spiritual agnostics" should find their own term, because they are not applying agnosticism (which is basically skepticism with a standard for empirical evidence before claiming to know something) to spiritual questions. I'd really appreciate it if they'd get their own word, but what can you do?

There is no short answer for what you believe. In terms of a god or gods, you are an atheist. In fact, you are a "strong" or "positive" atheist because you feel you know there are no gods, you don't simply not believe in any gods.

As for the universal energy you feel exists but is beyond the measure of science or mathematics, you are certain it's not a god. So you are still an atheist. I don't think there's a name for it since you haven't indicated that you think it's, for instance, Karma, or anything specific enough to place it into one or more pre-existing belief sets. You haven't said what it does, how it's known about, how it got there, etc. So there isnt' enough detail for anyone give a simple description of what your beliefs might be called.
Some will try. A lot of people call anything like that a Deist even though you aren't describing a detached creator god. Some will tell you to become a Unitarian, but that's an association, not your particular beliefs.

Some will say you are agnostic because they use that as a catch-all. But since you know this force exists without applying the sort of scientific standard (you say it's beyond science) that a traditional agnostic requires, you aren't agnostic.

Which is no reason to despair. Not everyone has a quick label to sum them up, some march to the beat of their own drummer and hold views too complex or different for quick summarization. Be glad you think for yourself. If I were you I'd sum it up by saying "I'm atheist with an asterisk." The asterisk is a footnote that takes a while to explain.

Answer 3

The answer to your question, "what the heck am I?" is, I'm sorry to say, confused.

First of all, there's no such thing as an "agnostic atheist". You either choose God (theist/deist), deny God (atheist), or admit there's no direct evidence either way (agnostic). Combining any of these belief labels produces a contradiction in terms. There may be different levels or degrees for these beliefs but the bottom line always boils down to: for, against or undecided.

I know you weren't referring to yourself as a "spiritual atheist". That label is completely mindless. If my dog thinks it's a bird, I guess it won't do him any harm unless he starts jumping out of trees. If somebody can rationalize spirits but rule out God, he's not harming anybody until he starts turning people into zombies.

That you "cannot prove the experience of a god or gods" is NOT one of the strong tenets of agnosticism . . . it's not even one of the weak tenets of agnosticism. Experience is a word used to describe something you can't describe. It's subjective and not measurable -- NO "experience" is provable. Perhaps you meant to say “existence” instead of “experience”.

Agnosticism simply says that there's not enough direct evidence for OR against God to make a rational choice, either way. If you are "absolutely certain that there are no gods", then you're an atheist; pure and simple.

You may take a logical position or proclaim absolute certainty that God is no more real than Spiderman but which God are you talking about? Any god known to man? Well, that's fine and perhaps you're right. But what about god(s) unknown to us?

For instance, we are literally made from the stuff of stars. Organic matter permeates the universe. Life on earth is tenacious, adaptive and prolific -- spreading out to fill every available niche -- as if it has a mind of its own. Given the scale of space and time manifest in the universe, we may well find -- perhaps in our lifetime -- that life is prolific across the entire universe and that it DOES have a mind of its own: and that mind is God. A cosmic God -- not a personal one.

The point is that, we don't yet know enough to prove we are correct in our certainty that God does not exist. In quantum physics, the act of measurement distorts what's being measured. Human consciousness seeps into the discussion of quantum physics. Our human acts affect what is true at the quantum level. In our quest for the "theory of everything", human consciousness, itself, keeps intruding into places where it doesn't seem to belong -- like the laws of physics.

Science has shown that what seems impossible is merely something we don't yet understand. Dark matter, black holes, gravitons . . . it just gets curiouser and curiouser.

So yes, "burden of proof" (or at least burden of direct evidence) DOES come into play. Proof is more certain than certainty. As sure as you are, stranger things have happened. Until we learn how to advance our knowledge with edicts or emotions or guesses, or ESP, or wishes, we'll just have to stick with the scientific method . . . it's gotten us to the moon and beyond, so it appears to be the best tool we have for understanding.

And what the heck is, "Different energies, yes, but no gods"? Are you attempting to be logical or clairvoyant? Pick one please.

You don't believe in Spiderman because you know that Stan Lee created him. God, on the other hand, has been a key figure in man's consciousness since before man learned how to make fire. That's long enough for God to become a human instinct -- an innate characteristic of being human.

You make a proclamation of belief . . . "I do believe in a collective, universal energy in nature that [is] far beyond the measure of science and mathematics". Well this sounds a lot like the cosmic God I proposed, above. Maybe you're not atheist after all.

If it is this "cosmic God" you believe in, then; until science can prove that God is a physical property of the universe, integrated into the laws of physics, the best title for you may be "a mystic".

As Albert Einstein said so well:

"Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust - we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper."

Answer 4

"Different energies, yes, but no gods. I cannot prove the existence of Spiderman but I don't believe in him whatsoever because I know he doesn't exist because of logic and not burden of proof. I do believe in a collective, universal energy in nature that, far beyond the measure of science and mathematics." YOU ARE A QUANTUM PHYSICIST! (seriously)

Answer 5

the same exact argument could be used for every single God ever spoken of? So which God are you talking about exactly? "Zeus cannot be proven by man, does this prove Zeus? I hate the argument that Zeus doesn't exist because he can't be proven, this contradicts the concept of Zeus itself. I mean if (he, for reference purposes only) is truly a higher life form, then he has no obligation to make himself known to any or furthermore all of his creation. It's not so hard for me to believe that i am less than myself. Solely because I learn and grow more everyday" See? so by your argument, every "God" ever spoken of could exist, regardless of lack of evidence for that being so. But maybe all of them are having a potluck and will reacquaint themselves with humans when it's over.

Answer 6

Chirstians can't prove the exhistance of god either. That has nothing to do this who you are. Drop all the labels stuff. Just believe what you want. If you are so involved with wanting to be part of a goup or whatever, then join a cult. If you are truly interested in finding your own answers and being spiritual then just do it and quit worrying what to call it. And most of all, don't worry what we think here @ yahoo answers!

Answer 7

I can't say what you are.I can tell you what you are not.You are neither an agnostic or an atheist or any combination of the two.There's really no room for spiritualism in either Agnosticism in it's truest sees no need to either believe or disbelieve in God or the supernatural.To them it's just not worth the trouble and a waste of energy.An Atheist on the other hand actively disputes God and the existence of the supernatural.I think peoples desire to classify themselves has caused confusion between the two.My opinion believe what you want and keep it to yourself.

Answer 8

An agnostic claims neither faith NOR disbelief in God. It's impossible to be an agnostic atheist. That would be sort of an oxymoron. You appear to be an atheist.

Agnosticism (from the Greek "a," meaning "without," and Gnosticism or "gnosis," meaning knowledge) means "unknowable," and is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims—particularly theological claims regarding metaphysics, afterlife or the existence of God, god(s), deities, or even ultimate reality—is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently unknowable due to the nature of subjective experience.
Agnostics claim either that it is not possible to have absolute or certain knowledge of God or gods; or, alternatively, that while individual certainty may be possible, they personally have no knowledge. Agnosticism in both cases involves some form of skepticism.
Demographic research services normally list agnostics in the same category as atheists and non-religious people,[1] although this can be misleading depending on the number of agnostic theists who identify themselves first as agnostics and second as followers of a particular religion

Answer 9

Agnosticism doesn't have to mean that you think there may be a God. It can mean that you believe there is just something bigger, like energies that you described.

I think you got it right with the Agnostic Atheist.

Answer 10

id still stand to the point that its better to believe than not to believe at all..its like losing without trying..nobody cant say how God exist but still nobody could tell how universe ever been created...

Answer 11

Your spirituality sounds like panthiesm. It is more logically sound than established religions. I suggest you look up the ideas of logical positivism, however, and consider them.