Shouldn't we all transcend being categorized as Theist, Atheist, Agnostic, etc..Why or Why Not?

Question

Me, being one of those guy's that become the fence for the Atheist and Theist to argue over, is like being-known for some terminal-illness we possess.

I remember an 'Advil' commercial, where the lady at the end states, "I have arthritis, but it doesn't have me!!"...

Shouldn't our beliefs be treated the same way, at least in the relationship of our idenities.

Prepare for Battle, Gents, the enemy is about, ....

"No son, I don't know what the enemy looks like, just shoot at whatever crosses your path allright??"

"But dad, what if you cross my path?"

"That's it, give me that rifle, you ignoramus, you!!??"

"Sorrrrryyyy?!!?"

http://www.relgioustolerance.org

Daren: Ahh..... Greed, the root of all-evil or was it the love of greed, ya your right, no need to split hairs. How, good sir, does your 'Pursuit of Happieness' fair?? Insights???

Jack D: Cool!!, hey can you recomend any other religious-tolerance sites, the public, I'm afraid, grow weary of mine???

Beutyan: Well said Miss!! Transcendence thru Tolerance......Leading by example would you say, the best education/awareness-tool...??? That is for doing so, as you suggest??

Uncle Remus: I believe I agree with you, and guess I was exposed to this as a young-child, my Grandpa, even though I knew where he actually stood on some-issue, would always play devil's advocate to stir-the-pot to get my goat...Most of you, may see this present in my other posts...Always a pleasure, Welcome, by the way...

Sniperea...: Thanks for comeing!, I may be Naieve, but I guess I choose to believe in a higher-power so I can choose to strive to be a better-me, but don't let any other believers find out for they may think I'm trying to become, God, and we all know what happened to the last guy that tried that 2000 years ago...

Other then that, I agree, sportsmanship, should be a part of debate, on any issue, and in any argument for that matter...

Ruby: Amen! Sister!, or Right On!, whichever you prefer, Welcome....Coffee, Tea....anyone??

Clint: Welcome! I agree with you in spirit, I guess what I was trying to get at with this question is :

Categories were meant for man, not man for categories....

Smart: If I may be so bold, false-humility looks bad on you, I'd disagree with your Avatar's real-name, but then maybe there is method, to that there, madness...

Thank You.

Sly Fox: Well said, sir, and I'll try to remain as objective as possible, to your suggestion.

As to your post, also, well stated, I believe most of us are communicating that we are frustrated that beliefs have become a picket-line to cross between Union-members and Corporate-members, and isn't about time we challenge this stigma???

Answer 1

We should learn to accept the beliefs of others as their own. Learn what we can from their beliefs & find a common ground or go seperate ways. It is a big world, but on the contrary it's getting smaller every day.

Answer 2

I use the term agnostic in it's literal sense, No Knowledge, as I believe it to be the most honest description of my state where the religious debate is concerned.
I have in my humble opinion a wide though not complete under standing of many forms of religion and of scientific thought.
I am in agreement with the other answers and I would say word for word with 'snipereality' (with one little change to his/her formate, i.e. the use of the second person form which I would replace with the word 'one'). therefore I will try not to repeat that which has already been said.

When 'darren m' talks about greed being the root of all evil I am tempted to agree, but I truly feel that the seed from which the root has grown is the Word. (this may well soon appear in some form of question in the R&S CAT., just to see the fireworks and with the hope of simulating more complex thought patterns, (One lives in hope)).
When stating the Word as the seed I am indicating as 'Ruby' has to some extent already done that categorizing is responsible for separating humanity on many issues.
The word in it's curd basic form is imperfect and a leads to misunderstanding and until the collective human consciousness arrives at the point of true understanding the untamed word will be a wild beast running a mock in the minds of primitives.

As to the question "Shouldn't we all transcend being categorized as Theist, Atheist, Agnostic, etc..Why or Why Not?"

I will quote an old Africa adage.
"Before one can truly believe one must learn to have doubt!"

As I have said I use the Word Agnostic, for I have doubt and I truly hope that this will continue to be the state in which I stay.
Because in my state of doubt I am left open to question and not blinded my the belief in the Words of others.

I know almost nothing but am will to search for something that may lead me to knowing a little more.

Oh that I could call myself a true gnostic in the literal sense, but to do this I must walk to the point of true objectivity, and I think that at least here in the Philosophical CAT. the relative difficultly which this entails will be apreicated.

We need to classify but we should not use the A is A concept until A can be proven as being truly A.
There can be a A and a Not A cat but the Not A will never be an A it will always remain something which is not an A but not necessarily an opposite of A.

Ok, that may seem to twist thing a little in some minds so I will rephrase it.
We can say that the Bible is a book, and that a pile of pages is not a book, but a pile of pages is not an anti book.

The black an white thinking of many people is a sign of limited thinking and insecurity in the face of doubt.
I am not promoting grey thinking thought for that is little better,
even linear thought has it's draw backs!
People must learn to think in a spherial manner, Which is the name I gave to describe my method of analysing the world around me, and have since found that the phrase is already in use in the concepts of Gia theory (see link)
It fits quite nicely with my concept and is worth exploring. I will no doubt talk further about this in other Q&A's

I would just like to add here that though points are nice I would much prefer to be read.
Feel free to award others, All I ask is that I get a mention, that is if you feel I have made a valuable contribution to the debate.

FTWR

Answer 3

i completely agree. i HATE labels. i stopped referring to myself as an atheist a long time ago. for different reasons, one being that it soon began to seem to me that atheism, was the belief that i am right and you are wrong. but not only are you WRONG, you are ridiculously wrong, and i am here to make you see that, and i of course can say anything i want regardless of its offense to you and your religion because i don't believe in anything anyway. such a mind set is not only ignorant, but a complete waste of time. since when does "not believing in the existence of a god or gods" have anything at all to do with any sort of greater wisdom or understanding. it doesn't. just because you may feel a sense of self importance, considering there's no supreme being to dampen your ego, it doesn't make you any wiser, or cleverer, for that matter. the best it might do for you in the end, realisticly, is satisfy your need to ask the question for yourself, so that you may move on to more meanigful arguments that have answers that can actually be proven. it breaks down like this. regardless of what any of us believe, everything is the way it always was, god or no mysterious god, and it is utterly meaningless to debate over the matter, especially if your only intention is ruffle everyone elses feathers just to do it. because whether your right or not, guess what? it doesn't change anything.

Answer 4

When two opposing natures come into contact with one another there is bound to be unavoidable conflict. Different categories represent differences in opinion. It is unfortunate that even where there is much tolerance in one category of thought. Another will replace it.

This is just an observation and it's okay for us to disagree on the above point.

The Bible says with good reason "Blessed are the peacemakers..."

Answer 5

Categorizing is inherently limiting, and certain limits cause sadness to those who are under their yoke but have hope for more. Yet without categories there'd be no individuation, and thus all would be determined is, or is not. These are called the sea of Affirmation, and the sea of negation, aka, life and death respectively.

There IS, and all is.

For there is nothing to set the limit on what is... Non-existence can not do it, for it is comprehended, neither can existence do it, for it is of essence and not merely effect without cause.

The limits therefore are only in the perceptible effects, and not the innate Reality or Cause.

God bless.

Answer 6

Take All Of Them have confront Greed. While all have been busy with eachother have missed an important influence. Does anyone as about reality of Greed,Money.This belief runs through all . Building for it. Use bill of rights after religion seprate from state. refute debate greed.

Answer 7

Without some amount of categorizing everyone would have to explain exactly what they believe constantly.
I think the answer is to have even more subcategories for each category so that we can quickly and precisely identify more exactly what we believe in cases of philosophical or theological debates.

Answer 8

The day that we stop catagorizing or separating ourselves from each other that's the day we become one but will the one become enlightened or will it destroy itself.....?