I've had a 'crisis of atheism'

[Unfathomable Tao]

Hello everyone, sorry I haven't been on for almost a month. I've been really busy, but I want to share this with all of you. I've been feeling increasingly hopeless about life in general over the past weeks. That's not to say I was unhappy or life felt like it had no point, just that I started to realize atheism doesn't give me everything I need. It was during this 'crisis' of sorts that I realized I as a westerner have always admired the Greek mythos and the Olympians. Since I'm a philosophical Taoist, I know that preference can be cultural, and its still alright, because its part of the bigger whole. I still accept the Tao as the ground of things, but I can't call myself an atheist anymore. I decided I need to feel like there is 'something', something bigger to it all, and I need to feel like my doing good really matters. I can admit this is something I 'need'. Its probably largely emotional. I can't be a monotheist because I still don't want a worldview that says 'here is all the answers'. I wouldn't be any kind of skeptic if I wanted that. Therefore, I've decided I am going to be a polytheist. I don't know if its alright to believe in gods solely because you need 'something', and you really want the gods to be real- I've always loved the Greek gods. I've decided personally it is alright, and I'm trying to decide if Zeus or Athena will be my patron deity, so that's it really. Thanks for reading guys. I'll be around again.

 

[Iti oj]

Hope it brings you what you need

 

[sun rise]

Hope it brings you what you need

I echo that sentiment.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I back the other two.

Best of luck.

 

[columbus]

Therefore, I've decided I am going to be a polytheist. I don't know if its alright to believe in gods solely because you need 'something', and you really want the gods to be real- I've always loved the Greek gods. I've decided personally it is alright,

What this sounds like, to me, is deism coupled with a fondness for ancient myth.
That seems totally workable to me.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

Hot chocolate fixes everything.
Here.....

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Hello everyone, sorry I haven't been on for almost a month. I've been really busy, but I want to share this with all of you. I've been feeling increasingly hopeless about life in general over the past weeks. That's not to say I was unhappy or life felt like it had no point, just that I started to realize atheism doesn't give me everything I need. It was during this 'crisis' of sorts that I realized I as a westerner have always admired the Greek mythos and the Olympians. Since I'm a philosophical Taoist, I know that preference can be cultural, and its still alright, because its part of the bigger whole. I still accept the Tao as the ground of things, but I can't call myself an atheist anymore. I decided I need to feel like there is 'something', something bigger to it all, and I need to feel like my doing good really matters. I can admit this is something I 'need'. Its probably largely emotional. I can't be a monotheist because I still don't want a worldview that says 'here is all the answers'. I wouldn't be any kind of skeptic if I wanted that. Therefore, I've decided I am going to be a polytheist. I don't know if its alright to believe in gods solely because you need 'something', and you really want the gods to be real- I've always loved the Greek gods. I've decided personally it is alright, and I'm trying to decide if Zeus or Athena will be my patron deity, so that's it really. Thanks for reading guys. I'll be around again.

I hope you find meaning with the gods. Good luck, friend.

 

[Demonslayer]

Therefore, I've decided I am going to be a polytheist.

This boggles my mind. So a month ago you recognized the Greek Gods as merely tales, not factually real...and then you just "decided" to believe they are real?? How does that work? How do you convince yourself?

I don't know if its alright to believe in gods solely because you need 'something',

I think it's "alright" to a certain point. I mean morally it's fine, I am just personally against adults engaging in magical thinking, so if a friend told me this sudden change I'd be concerned about mental health.

Overall I don't think it's a problem, I just can't imagine how it's possible. I mean I don't believe in Orcs, I couldn't just wake up tomorrow and believe in Orcs. My mind has made up it's mind, I guess you'd say.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Hello everyone, sorry I haven't been on for almost a month. I've been really busy, but I want to share this with all of you. I've been feeling increasingly hopeless about life in general over the past weeks. That's not to say I was unhappy or life felt like it had no point, just that I started to realize atheism doesn't give me everything I need. It was during this 'crisis' of sorts that I realized I as a westerner have always admired the Greek mythos and the Olympians. Since I'm a philosophical Taoist, I know that preference can be cultural, and its still alright, because its part of the bigger whole. I still accept the Tao as the ground of things, but I can't call myself an atheist anymore. I decided I need to feel like there is 'something', something bigger to it all, and I need to feel like my doing good really matters. I can admit this is something I 'need'. Its probably largely emotional. I can't be a monotheist because I still don't want a worldview that says 'here is all the answers'. I wouldn't be any kind of skeptic if I wanted that. Therefore, I've decided I am going to be a polytheist. I don't know if its alright to believe in gods solely because you need 'something', and you really want the gods to be real- I've always loved the Greek gods. I've decided personally it is alright, and I'm trying to decide if Zeus or Athena will be my patron deity, so that's it really. Thanks for reading guys. I'll be around again.

Similarly I was brought up and remained a staunch believer in atheism for many years. I certainly think skepticism and theism, inc. monotheism are compatible.

We are all born atheists, as atheists often state as an argument for the 'default truth'. But accepting the world 'just is' without need of explanation runs inherently counter to our curious minds

Believing in God is the result of the original skeptical deduction, that blind chance does not adequately account for the world we see around us.

 

[Demonslayer]

We are all born atheists, as atheists often state as an argument for the 'default truth'

Agree

But accepting the world 'just is' without need of explanation runs inherently counter to our curious minds

Agree

Believing in God is the result of the original skeptical deduction, that blind chance does not adequately account for the world we see around us.

This doesn't follow from the first two, though. No atheist I know says "the world just is" and is not curious about the origins, if any, of the universe. Nor do atheists attribute anything to "blind chance." On the contrary, scientists are actively and passionately searching to answer the mysteries of the universe every day. In fact I think things like space exploration and other advanced studies of the universe around us represent a greater curiosity than merely reading a holy book, saying "yep, that's how it all happened" and being satisfied that we have all our answers. Non-believers are still searching for the answers, while believers believe they have the answers neatly summarized in a book.

The one explanation for our world/universe that says "a being called a deity made it" is not the only way to address our curiosity about our world. It's not like there are only 2 options: A) "the world just is and I'm not curious" and B) "the world is, therefore something called a God must have created it." You have mischaracterized the atheist position as "accepting the world 'just is' without need of explanation." Nothing could be further from the truth. I'm an atheist who is extremely curious and does need an explanation, as are the hundreds of thousands of atheists who are feverishly researching the world around us. I'm just not willing to accept the explanation that some primitive person jotted down 2000 years ago because I may not know what the answer IS, but I dang sure know what it AIN'T.

 

[Maponos]

My advice to you is to really research the deities you feel a connection to and cultivate a personal relationship with the deities. Don't go by superficial appearances and surface knowledge. In the case for finding 'patron deities', you need to use your heart/intuition instead of your brain/mind.

One way to do this is to research your personal astrology. I had already come to terms with my own self (as it is) before I researched my personal astrology, but when I did, it really vindicated how I felt and what I was connected to (Chthonic deities). It takes a lot of personal acceptance, but when you 'come full circle' with yourself, it really opens your eyes and you are able to take advantage of your nature and evolve.

As for Taoism, it can easily be a combined with Greek polytheism, especially as a philosophy. I myself love Taoism and Taoist astrology.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

This doesn't follow from the first two, though. No atheist I know says "the world just is" and is not curious about the origins, if any, of the universe. Nor do atheists attribute anything to "blind chance."

You'd have to argue that with Hawking for one. The flying spaghetti multiverse, relies 100% explicitly on blind chance, by an infinite probability machine being granted infinite random stabs in the dark to hit the target.. by chance.


And before such theories were forced into the atheist imagination, by the priest Lemaitre's primeval atom theory validating the Biblical claim of a specific creation event...

'it just is' was absolutely the position of atheists in various static/ eternal models. I remember being told by an atheist teacher who still rejected the Big Bang, that it was only my inferior intellect that compelled me to belief the universe had a beginning- and the superior mind can grasp that it 'just is and always was' .

Of course there are many different individual sects/beliefs within atheism, but it all comes down to chance, luck, fluke as opposed to creativity, purpose, will- regarding all the designs found in the universe or life.

Anyway- point being- to be a theist is to be skeptical of atheist beliefs, and vice versa, there is no 'default' assumption either way. - would you agree with this?

 

[Skwim]

Unfathomable Tao,

Often we set aside our rationality and acquiesce to our needs. More often than not it's why people adopt religion. I don't find this particularly laudable, but nevertheless it can go a long way in stabilizing one's life. We do what we have to, or at least try to, so if religion is the answer for you, go ahead and please yourself. You have an awful lot of company.


.

 

[Jumi]

This doesn't follow from the first two, though. No atheist I know says "the world just is" and is not curious about the origins, if any, of the universe.

Well I've said this when I was atheist and still do. It has nothing to do with atheism per se. I'm more interested in things that can be known enough to satisfy my desire for certainty in knowledge and what is available for the layman isn't enough to satisfy while the technicalities which interest me are too time consuming to verify equation by equation.

To explain the above further... it's not that I wouldn't be interested in knowing about origins of the universe, but the lack of reliable information about "origins" is reason enough not to involve myself in the pursuit. On the scale of history and size of even the known universe, other, more unlikely things could account for something we observe. To give an example dark matter could be flying through us at immense speeds or it might not exist at all and our gravitational equations need to account for something we don't understand yet. If 80% of the mass of the universe is unaccounted for and could be solved by bettered understanding of gravity then I believe there can be other causes to things we feel are figured out. Having the theoretical physicists study cosmology is infinitely better than not attempting it at all or saying goddidit.

Nor do atheists attribute anything to "blind chance." On the contrary, scientists are actively and passionately searching to answer the mysteries of the universe every day.

Correct. This is oftentimes hard for many who believe in supernatural beings guiding or creating things in our universe.

In fact I think things like space exploration and other advanced studies of the universe around us represent a greater curiosity than merely reading a holy book, saying "yep, that's how it all happened" and being satisfied that we have all our answers. Non-believers are still searching for the answers, while believers believe they have the answers neatly summarized in a book.

Yes, if our curiosity was satisfied with reading one small book we wouldn't be very curious at all, would we?

 

[ArtieE]

And before such theories were forced into the atheist imagination, by the priest Lemaitre's primeval atom theory validating the Biblical claim of a specific creation event...

It validates no such thing. You are deliberately misrepresenting Lemaitre. Lemaitre said: "We may speak of this event as of a beginning. I do not say a creation." https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8847

 

[Jumi]

You'd have to argue that with Hawking for one. The flying spaghetti multiverse, relies 100% explicitly on blind chance, by an infinite probability machine being granted infinite random stabs in the dark to hit the target.. by chance.

This your perception what it means. What you seem to hint at is that probabilities wouldn't produce seemingly unlikely outcomes given time, but that it would require a causative agent. So a poker game with a royal flush would be the work of genius and not probability?

And before such theories were forced into the atheist imagination, by the priest Lemaitre's primeval atom theory validating the Biblical claim of a specific creation event...

This makes me doubt if you understand what "forced" means.

'it just is' was absolutely the position of atheists in various static/ eternal models. I remember being told by an atheist teacher who still rejected the Big Bang, that it was only my inferior intellect that compelled me to belief the universe had a beginning- and the superior mind can grasp that it 'just is and always was' .

Well he was being an ***. Atheists have picked both sides of that debate and you seem to want to remember only the losing argument.

Of course there are many different individual sects/beliefs within atheism, but it all comes down to chance, luck, fluke as opposed to creativity, purpose, will- regarding all the designs found in the universe or life.

Just like there are a billion sects of Christianity?

Anyway- point being- to be a theist is to be skeptical of atheist beliefs, and vice versa, there is no 'default' assumption either way. - would you agree with this?

Default doesn't equal true. Just because I started as an atheist, doesn't mean it was truth. We start with not much understanding of numbers but when we learn to use them what seemed intuitive to us has changed. Real knowledge rarely equals common sense of a newborn. The reason why atheism is "default" is that we require teaching for us to accept any given god or creativity to create our own. Whether it's true or not another thing.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

It validates no such thing. You are deliberately misrepresenting Lemaitre. Lemaitre said: "We may speak of this event as of a beginning. I do not say a creation." https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8847

it was the literal creation of all time/space matter/energy as we can possibly know it. If the word offends it's likely because of the implication rather than the word.

Lemaitre went out of his way to distance his theory from any religious connotations because the obvious implications were exactly why atheist academia opposed it

 

[Guy Threepwood]

This your perception what it means. What you seem to hint at is that probabilities wouldn't produce seemingly unlikely outcomes given time, but that it would require a causative agent. So a poker game with a royal flush would be the work of genius and not probability?

if gambler played 5 royal flushes in a row, would you suspect chance or creative dabbling? and that's still selling the universe very short!

This makes me doubt if you understand what "forced" means.

okay- strongly motivated then

Well he was being an ***. Atheists have picked both sides of that debate and you seem to want to remember only the losing argument.
[/quote]

The theistic implications mysteriously retreated as the theory became better founded

In the 1920s and 1930s almost every major cosmologist preferred an eternal steady state universe, and several complained that the beginning of time implied by the Big Bang imported religious concepts into physics; this objection was later repeated by supporters of the steady state theory

Just like there are a billion sects of Christianity?

sure, and I doubt you'd find two people in the same church that agree on everything!

Default doesn't equal true. Just because I started as an atheist, doesn't mean it was truth. We start with not much understanding of numbers but when we learn to use them what seemed intuitive to us has changed. Real knowledge rarely equals common sense of a newborn. The reason why atheism is "default" is that we require teaching for us to accept any given god or creativity to create our own. Whether it's true or not another thing.

First part is a good point

but on default- I certainly wasn't born believing in the Big Crunch or steady state or multiverses, or any other atheist materialistic/naturalistic origins for the universe.

So could I not just as easily claim 'a-materialism' as the default position?

How about there is no default- every explanation should stand on it's own merits?

 

[Desert Snake]

but on default- I certainly wasn't born believing in the Big Crunch or steady state or multiverses, or any other atheist materialistic/naturalistic origins for the universe.

So could I not just as easily claim 'a-materialism' as the default position?

How about there is no default- every explanation should stand on it's own merits?

Your association of atheism to those universe ideas, is merely your own. Not being a big-bang theory adherent, does not necessarily make one an atheist

 

[Brickjectivity]

Hello everyone, sorry I haven't been on for almost a month. I've been really busy, but I want to share this with all of you. I've been feeling increasingly hopeless about life in general over the past weeks. That's not to say I was unhappy or life felt like it had no point, just that I started to realize atheism doesn't give me everything I need. It was during this 'crisis' of sorts that I realized I as a westerner have always admired the Greek mythos and the Olympians. Since I'm a philosophical Taoist, I know that preference can be cultural, and its still alright, because its part of the bigger whole. I still accept the Tao as the ground of things, but I can't call myself an atheist anymore. I decided I need to feel like there is 'something', something bigger to it all, and I need to feel like my doing good really matters. I can admit this is something I 'need'. Its probably largely emotional. I can't be a monotheist because I still don't want a worldview that says 'here is all the answers'. I wouldn't be any kind of skeptic if I wanted that. Therefore, I've decided I am going to be a polytheist. I don't know if its alright to believe in gods solely because you need 'something', and you really want the gods to be real- I've always loved the Greek gods. I've decided personally it is alright, and I'm trying to decide if Zeus or Athena will be my patron deity, so that's it really. Thanks for reading guys. I'll be around again.

I deeply empathize. I think hope is what you need, and there is reason to hope. I suggest that religion is not only so you can understand theology. Consider this: If you are studying an ancient religion and don't feel connected with the people who first practiced it, then it will be like getting water from a turnip. They can't share with you like they want to, but they want to. They are sharing everything they have with you! The entirety of who they are is what you need to make sense of what religious information they offer. If you don't pursue a holistic understanding and a sort of timeless friendship with them you will walk away with almost nothing, but if you pay attention to everything then they will share their hopes with you. You will then hopefully no longer be a skeptic. You will see vistas of possibility and excitement, and you may also find belief or not. Best of luck!