Jump to content

Ignosticism As A Possible Form Of Spirituality.


Guest Valk0010
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Valk0010

Break my balls if I say anything here greviously wrong. But a position that has started to make a lot more sense to me, and is still, I guess fortunately(ocd religion issues flaring up again), is ignosticism. Essentially the position states that, the word god, and I would go as far to say the concept of a god itself is impossible to define. And because it is impossible to define, the concept becomes without meaning.

 

This view appeals to me mostly for the reason of, how fragmented even religions like Mormonism are. They have two branches themselves for heavens sake. Islam has like 3 to my knowledge and then there is bahai which combines all of the abrahamic religions. Hinduism bleed into sikhism. There are even different schools of buddhism. That is even not starting on paganism at all. You may say, that they agree on essentials but if they existed would we even have to discuss that. None of them can seem to figure out what the truth is.

 

If we can't figure out what we mean by god, then why debate it at all. It seems even religious people can't make up their minds. Even in science, you try to not answer one question by creating three from what I understand. The god answer to me seems to violate simplicity in that regard. So you solve a mystery by creating a even bigger one that if you look at any theologian or atheologian and find has never been solved. Ignosticism just makes sense.

 

Now as far as atheism goes, I can't believe in any gods if I find them without meaning in regards to terminology. So I guess I am technically a atheist. Though agnostic is becoming a more fitting term as I go into learning things from science.

 

But where does that leave me, this term. I feel it leaves me in a more spiritual place. I don't have to focus so much on the evidential, and I can focus more on the meaning of life. And I don't feel any subtle cognitive dissonance about that. Its really interesting to me anyway. I can be less judgemental of the finer things of say the bible or any other religious text. That I am proud off because i feel it can make me a stronger but kinder critic of these things. I can do more without a mental block telling me, this shit is stupid. I am happy about that. I figure I might share it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if I would call it a spirituality - it's certainly a functional philosophical stance.

 

But if it works for you, it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Valk0010

I don't know if I would call it a spirituality - it's certainly a functional philosophical stance.

 

But if it works for you, it works.

I was trying to say that it would allow me to be spiritual.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

God does have a concrete, if vague definition. Agreement upon the particulars is what is truly lacking. Ignosticism is Atheism masquerading as a higher form of incredulity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Valk0010

God does have a concrete, if vague definition. Agreement upon the particulars is what is truly lacking. Ignosticism is Atheism masquerading as a higher form of incredulity.

Sure we all can say X created the earth. That is about as far as you get on concrete, that would be like having only one half a sentence as far as I am concerned.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...the word god, and I would go as far to say the concept of a god itself is impossible to define. And because it is impossible to define, the concept becomes without meaning.

 

I couldn't agree more!!! The only good thing about it is this: if a person walks up to me and asks me if I believe in God, by the very act that they are asking me that question, I can pretty much rule out that I believe in their God. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did Reboot go? Too bad he hasn't been around here awhile. Used to post all the time and I never heard that word before he came on here. He was another ignostic. I called him affectionately "golden frootloop".

 

Yes, god is a difficult word. Its hard to know what is meant by it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Babylonian Dream

See the problem isn't that "god" is indefineable, its that there are many many words superimposed meaning "god", which creates the problem of defineability. And theists like it that way, they can switch between words, words that will mean 10 different things to 10 different people, and use them as if they were a single thing. Thereby boosting their arguements with making arguements about their god. He's omnipotent and omniscient but you have free will. Those multi-gods that are singular can't possibly exist, but you can't argue either way because its just so ambiguous, and intentionally so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ignosticism is pretty cool. It's an appealing alternative to the theist-atheist-agnostic conundrum. I especially like the way it sounds. Instead of the "this is what I am guys" feel of the most common positions on God it has more of a "herp derp I don't want to get caught up in this silly ol argument but here chew on this shit" feel. It even sounds strangely humble, maybe because it sounds like "ignorance". Pretty cool word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This view appeals to me mostly for the reason of, how fragmented even religions like Mormonism are. They have two branches themselves for heavens sake. Islam has like 3 to my knowledge and then there is bahai which combines all of the abrahamic religions. Hinduism bleed into sikhism. There are even different schools of buddhism. That is even not starting on paganism at all. You may say, that they agree on essentials but if they existed would we even have to discuss that. None of them can seem to figure out what the truth is.

 

You might find Discordianism interesting. They're probably the only religion that encourages schisms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See the problem isn't that "god" is indefineable, its that there are many many words superimposed meaning "god", which creates the problem of defineability. And theists like it that way, they can switch between words, words that will mean 10 different things to 10 different people, and use them as if they were a single thing. Thereby boosting their arguements with making arguements about their god. He's omnipotent and omniscient but you have free will. Those multi-gods that are singular can't possibly exist, but you can't argue either way because its just so ambiguous, and intentionally so.

 

 

"A number of blind men came to an elephant. Somebody told them that it was an elephant. The blind men asked, ‘What is the elephant like?’ and they began to touch its body. One of them said: 'It is like a pillar.' This blind man had only touched its leg. Another man said, ‘The elephant is like a husking basket.’ This person had only touched its ears. Similarly, he who touched its trunk or its belly talked of it differently. In the same way, he who has seen the Lord in a particular way limits the Lord to that alone and thinks that He is nothing else."

 

~Ramakrishna

 

Are you sure the reasons are as you stated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.