# Feeling Atheists



## bubbleboy (Sep 28, 2010)

I was raised catholic and gave it up pretty easily. As I got older it just stopped making sense for me. I try to keep an open mind, but I'm probably more so an atheist than anything else.


----------



## Eloise (May 30, 2011)

You rang, yes, hello, I am a feeling atheist. 

Catholic school taught me how to hate and question religion. Somehow, be bullied directly after religion class makes Jesus lose his luster.
I'm pretty broad with my dislike towards institution, though, so religion isn't the only victim.


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

It's the same issue as assuming all Thinkers are bound for atheism.
I might even venture into the world and religion, because everyone knows religions big in the US and their culture spreads far and wide, so much so I probably hear more about America than I do my own country from the internet hahaha
Here, my sisters were baptized, father went to a catholic school. But not really what you'd call practicing catholics, I was pretty untouched by organized religion. Mum took me to Jehovah's Witness' kingdom hall when I was kid but I just got bored ate orange tic tacs and fell asleep.
I'm not even sure if I know any religious people, if I do, they're certainly not vocal about it.
It's not a major part of our culture, religious groups are a minority here in Australia. Though I do remember there being a good reason as to why Politicians appeal to that minority at times, something to do with people generally view religious people here are being better in some moral way.
One thing I know for sure is the religious people i've met take pride in how they dress, make me look like shit hahaha.

So yes, im pretty much an Atheist. I say that because you know theres that catch with not actually knowing and there being the potential to be wrong about it all. Though im pretty sure in my belief, I just like to leave room open to be wrong for most things so I can adapt. ramble ramble mumbo jamble im done.


----------



## St. Josef the Chewable (Dec 9, 2012)

Hmm...


----------



## St. Josef the Chewable (Dec 9, 2012)

nreynolds1990 said:


> The reason for that is, as many atheists including myself will tell you, is that if you believe something you should believe it based on evidence. Evidence is how we know something is true or if someone is trying to pull one over you. A great example, if I told you that magic fairies talked to me at night and I lived with a purple dragon you'd probably not believe me and think I'm completely nuts. Why? Because there is no substantial evidence supporting the existence of fairies and dragons. But if I could produce solid evidence that magic fairies do indeed talk to me and I live with a purple dragon then you would really have no option to believe it. But without that evidence you are not going to simply take me on faith that what I am telling you is the truth.
> 
> In the same fashion there is no evidence to support the existence of a god or gods or the supernatural for that matter. William Kingdon Clifford said, "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." If you are concerned with what you are believing is actually true, grounded in reality, and not a lie or some fantasy; if you are concerned about not being deceived then you will demand evidence of claims made to validate the claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If that evidence cannot be provided the default position is not to believe it. Innocent until proven guilty so to speak. The claim is not valid until it is proven. That is why Richard Dawkins and many NT atheists think that way.


Oh, I agree with you --- and Richard Dawkins --- on this point, but I suppose I should have phrased this differently. What I was trying to say was not "How in the world can Dawkins not imagine what it's like to have faith?" in the sense that it is logically defensible to believe w/o evidence. What I meant to express, rather, is that NFs, unlike NTs, tend to empathize with other people's positions to such a degree that they can easily picture that person's worldview, imagining themselves looking out through that person's eyes, even if they completely and utterly disagree with that person. 

Imagine my NF predicament, dear reader --- I sometimes find myself in the ridiculous position of not only understanding my enemy's perspective intellectually, but sometimes over-identifying with it, to the point of actually sympathizing with it! I can't imagine Dawkins or any sane NT doing this. And these independent, skeptical scamps, god (sic) luv 'em, frequently come to this position at a tender age: "Why would anybody believe in nonsense? I mean, it's literally non-sense," says little Richie Dawkins, age 9. It took me years of steady pondering to come to that point!

NTs are temperamentally out of step with most people, who believe all sorts of things for any number of (frequently nonsensical) reasons. But I am an atheist for the reasons you described, i.e. there is no evidence that I'm aware of for the existence of a deity.


----------



## turtleducks (Jul 13, 2011)

More of the religious people I know really well are Ts than Fs, actually. Of course I'm not trying to say that this is universally true, but just as there are many Ts who are religious, there are many Fs who are not. 

I'm personally an atheist, but the way I arrived at that conclusion for myself was more intuitive than logical.


----------



## Tula13 (Dec 2, 2012)

ISFJ atheist here. I was raised Catholic and was very religious in my teen years. Leaving my faith was a gradual process of asking questions and using my brain to see things weren't adding up or making sense. 

I'm not sure what the statistics are, if there are actually more non-believers that are feelers or thinkers. Certainly some of the most vocal atheists are/were NTs, Richard Dawkins INTP, Christopher Hitchens INTJ, Bill Maher ENTP. It's possible feeler-atheists just aren't as loud about it and therefore appear to have smaller numbers, especially Fe users may not want to offend the religious.


----------



## Nightshade (Dec 4, 2012)

I'm a cross between Agnostic and spiritual. I was Atheist for a while growing up, not because I was taught that, but mainly because I found religion to be silly. I'm spiritual on the level where I respect nature and believe in a creator, but nothing concrete. I don't believe there is any god who we can evoke through prayers. It's mostly a matter of having respect for the thing or essence that created us. I do come off as an Atheist at times, however, especially with my outlook on organized religion. 

I went to church once when I was a child, and it turned me off. I went again as an adult, to be polite as result of an invitation, and felt uncomfortable. I've just never felt right about religion in general. I do question things and can't believe in something or unless I can find some answers. I'm not the type to accept truths that could possibly be false. I'd rather know a dark truth, than have a false sense of hope.


----------



## SPtheGhost (Apr 26, 2010)

Matis said:


> I believe whether you are religious or not mainly depends on your surroundings, and less on your type. A lot of Americans are religious, because that's how they were raised to be. I live in Estonia. Most of Estonians (80% or so) are atheist, because that's how they were raised to be.
> 
> Of course, there are exceptions everywhere.



surroundings matter 

type also definitely matters


----------



## AdrianVanNyiha (Oct 11, 2012)

I suggest that you read Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis. Just a suggestion.


----------



## kindaconfused (Apr 30, 2010)

I am an INFP atheist. We do exist.


----------



## Embers (Jun 28, 2012)

I'm really unsure of what label to apply to my beliefs. I don't follow any religion but I follow a personal kind of spirituality I guess. I used to say I was an Atheist, but it doesn't fit.


----------



## Polymaniac (Apr 8, 2012)

I've met two INFP atheists, and both either were or are close friends of mine. One of them may be an ISFP, though.

I wouldn't actually consider myself to be an atheist, because it seems to imply to many that I follow some sort of positivist, Dawkinsian approach when it comes to metaphysics.


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

The one INFP I dated was an atheist, although he did allow himself to explore paganism. But it wasn't like he really believed in the paganism, it was more just something he chose to learn about as an outlet. In terms of God, he really didn't believe there was one, and was insistent about it and didn't have a lot of patience for overtly religious types. Religion, he felt, had hurt a lot of people in the world.

His family background was pretty despondent too. he had no contact with his family (parents or sibling). The father, I think, was in jail for awhile; and the mom was kind of mentally imbalanced; and there had also been some violence in the family. Long story short, "God" never fixed anything for him and was not dependable, and he had been forced to be very very independent and self-reliant. It's hard sometimes to shape what thoughts we have that are independent of events vs what has been shaped to some degree by events.

(The same goes for anyone of any relgious belief, not just atheists. Religious belief or lack of it seems to grow out of our life experiences in large part.)


----------



## anapuna (Mar 12, 2010)

religion seems to get in the way of meeting people. then there is all the violence, and lying. if you can't nicely with it you shouldn't play with it at all. listen to your mother.


----------



## Azn Hippie (Dec 31, 2012)

I grew up without any Religious beliefs imposed on me. My people have no Religion, only cultural beliefs and the concept of a higher power. Nothing else beyond that. 

In my late teens I joined at church to find meaning in life. I went for a month and stopped going. In my early twenties I returned to church to 'give it another shot'. I left again after two months.

I did my best to be a 'Good' Christian boy. But I felt like I didn't fit in and I just felt un-easy about the whole religion. I was unsure of this whole God concept and kind of in limbo. One night I came across a film that changed my whole life. A whole new world opened up to me. I discovered that there is *so much **more* to life than Religion alone. From there I discovered many great Teachers and Leaders who were not aligned with a Religion.


----------



## Ajatar (Jan 7, 2013)

I considered myself an agnostic for several years, and never went to church after I turned fifteen. Then, early last year I went to church for a wedding, and suddenly felt so embarrassed. I just kept thinking "how are people buying these stories? Don't they feel silly, sitting in this building; singing and chanting at some form of holy man in the sky?" After that, I distanced myself from religious beliefs alltogether. I just can't sit in a church without feeling like an idiot. It's difficult to explain more than that, but does anybody else feel the same way?

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind religious people, I just don't understand how they're thinking...


----------



## Random Ness (Oct 13, 2010)

Yes, I'm an atheist, as well as a science major and physicalist.

I de-converted from my religion because I realized that if I was born under a different religion, I would believe those magical stories with just as much vigor.


----------



## KateMarie999 (Dec 20, 2011)

I'm most decidedly NOT an atheist, I'm kind of the opposite, I'm a Christian (Southern Baptist). But I think it's very interesting that there are so many atheists here. I always sort of thought a feeler would want to feel like they're not alone out there, like there's someone watching over them. I guess that was a misconception. I really think it's all in your decisions. Ultimately, religion is a choice which leads to a lifestyle. So of course feelers can make the decision to believe there's no God. I don't think religion is type related, I know Christians of all types and atheists/agnostics of quite a few.


----------



## geekofalltrades (Feb 8, 2012)

I'm a feeling atheist. Although I'm also sort of a thinking feeler.


----------



## killemdeader (Dec 22, 2012)

I never really understood how someone from an educated background could be enthusiastically theist, actually. I understand spirituality, and I understand the community aspect, but I never really understood how these texts and specific beliefs became something people readily bought into; at the same time, atheism seems just as arbitrary. I'd consider myself an agnostic; I got bar-mitzvahed, I just never bought into the whole idea of the text being important, and traditions being meaningful. Some of the traditions are nice, and the language and community are cool, but there's just too much... blind hope and faith, and not enough critical thought for me to believe.


----------



## nreynolds1990 (Jan 8, 2012)

killemdeader said:


> I never really understood how someone from an educated background could be enthusiastically theist, actually. I understand spirituality, and I understand the community aspect, but I never really understood how these texts and specific beliefs became something people readily bought into; at the same time, atheism seems just as arbitrary. I'd consider myself an agnostic; I got bar-mitzvahed, I just never bought into the whole idea of the text being important, and traditions being meaningful. Some of the traditions are nice, and the language and community are cool, but there's just too much... blind hope and faith, and not enough critical thought for me to believe.


Now I'm curious, why do you think that atheism is arbitrary? I would argue that it is not.


----------



## Mr.Blayz (Nov 20, 2012)

I believe in god, and what Jesus tried to teach, however their are Hippocrates that follow the 10 commandments and ignored the second most important rule "under loving god" is loving your neighbor, and ignore the concepts in the bible spoken time after time, not to judge, and to forgive, to hate the sin and not the sinner, and because they ignore the most important concepts they give Muslims, Christians, Catholics, Jews, among others a bad name. so I believe in the bible in my own way. I believe if everyone would practice the concepts properly the world wouldn't be completely perfect but more perfect, and it would get better as humanity got better, so it saddens me when people refuse religion based on history of what it has done, and those who are quick to judge especially on homosexuality infidelity, because those people are just picking parts out of the bible and completely destroying the whole concept behind it


----------



## nreynolds1990 (Jan 8, 2012)

Mr.Blayz said:


> it saddens me when people refuse religion based on history of what it has done, and those who are quick to judge especially on homosexuality infidelity, because those people are just picking parts out of the bible and completely destroying the whole concept behind it


I don't reject religion because of what it has done in the past, Christianity is not the only religion. I reject religion because its irrational  but on the bible yes there are some good teachings but it also teaches some disgusting and abhorrent things that no one should live by.


----------



## aconite (Mar 26, 2012)

nreynolds1990 said:


> Are any NFs here atheist? This is a question I thought about today. For some reason I have the idea that F types are less prone to atheism so I'm wondering if there are any. If so why are you an atheist? SF types are also welcome to comment. There is no unified feeler forum so I posted it here


I'm an INFJ atheist (a "soft" atheist rather than "hard" atheist; I suppose I could be called an agnostic by some people, but I don't really care about the label). There wasn't a dramatic shift of worldview in my life; I never felt a need to be religious regardless of whom I was surrounded with; I can't find anything appealing about the concept of faith. The most prevalent religion where I live is Christianity, which is, in my opinion, internally inconsistent and outdated in many aspects. My life is whole without it. I like reading about religions sometimes, though... just as I like reading fantasy tales. I don't hate religious people, I think I'm pretty tolerant that way. Everyone is free to believe what they want as long as they don't hurt anyone with it, I guess. I don't want to convert anybody to atheism; neither I want to be converted, of course.


----------



## Mr.Blayz (Nov 20, 2012)

nreynolds1990 said:


> I don't reject religion because of what it has done in the past, Christianity is not the only religion. I reject religion because its irrational  but on the bible yes there are some good teachings but it also teaches some disgusting and abhorrent things that no one should live by.


if I would have seen anything in the bible that was in favor of hate, and punishment that had no justification I wouldn't believe in it, and a lot of things portrayed by the media about what the Christians have done wrong is true but only the evil are represented , there's times where I've seen something in the bible that I didn't understand but in time I figured it out and it was always for the greater good


----------



## nreynolds1990 (Jan 8, 2012)

Mr.Blayz said:


> if I would have seen anything in the bible that was in favor of hate, and punishment that had no justification I wouldn't believe in it, and a lot of things portrayed by the media about what the Christians have done wrong is true but only the evil are represented , there's times where I've seen something in the bible that I didn't understand but in time I figured it out and it was always for the greater good


There is a lot of messed up stuff in the Bible promoting the stuff that you just laid out. There are too many verses to comb here and I don't want this thread to evolve into a debate/argument so if you're interested PM me and I'll hit you up with some links of verses you can look up yourself. If you're not interested I won't share


----------



## Mr.Blayz (Nov 20, 2012)

nreynolds1990 said:


> There is a lot of messed up stuff in the Bible promoting the stuff that you just laid out. There are too many verses to comb here and I don't want this thread to evolve into a debate/argument so if you're interested PM me and I'll hit you up with some links of verses you can look up yourself. If you're not interested I won't share


If your reasons for not believing concern your morals, concern upholding love, peace, and justice then I will not be one to protest your beliefs. if you have a good heart you're alright with me, just make sure you have a read and have your own opinions before looking into others


----------



## killemdeader (Dec 22, 2012)

nreynolds1990 said:


> Now I'm curious, why do you think that atheism is arbitrary? I would argue that it is not.


Because, atheism relies on having some absolute truth of it's own, that "deities do not exist". I can understand weak atheism, rejecting any belief structure on an individual basis, but rejecting that the entire idea is even in the realm of possibility seems impossible. How can you say with confidence that something spiritual does not exist through non-spiritual means? Atheism seems just as close minded as theism to me.


----------



## nreynolds1990 (Jan 8, 2012)

killemdeader said:


> Because, atheism relies on having some absolute truth of it's own, that "deities do not exist". I can understand weak atheism, rejecting any belief structure on an individual basis, but rejecting that the entire idea is even in the realm of possibility seems impossible. How can you say with confidence that something spiritual does not exist through non-spiritual means? Atheism seems just as close minded as theism to me.


I think that you have a warped view of what atheism is. I'm sure there are atheists that subscribe to what you just described, not all atheists are the same. But the majority of atheists I have run into believe the same thing as me. Atheism addresses the issue of belief not knowledge. In regards to the question at hand there are two positions: There is a god and there is no god. Both theism and atheism only address the proposition that there is a god. Much like in a court case the only proposition addressed is guilt, not innocence. In a court case you can vote guilty meaning that there is enough evidence to support the accusation against the defendant. Or you can vote not guilty, meaning that there is not enough evidence to support the accusation against the defendant. Not guilty doesn't mean innocent though, it just means that the evidence does not support the accusation. It is up to the prosecution, the one making the positive claim to prove guilt. It is not the responsibility to the defense to prove innocence only to show that the prosecution's evidence doesn't add up or that the prosecution really has no case at all. The burden of proof is on the prosecution not the defense.

Much in the same way, theists are making a positive claim and atheists reject the claim saying that theists have not met their burden of proof. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence. I and many atheists are not saying there is no god or that there is no possibility that any can exist, we are voting not guilty on the existence of god because the evidence isn't. there. Therefore we don't believe in a god because of the lack of evidence. Same reason that I and likely you don't believe in invisible purple dragons. The evidence for the existence of purple dragons is scant, can you honestly say there is no way, no possibility, invisible purple dragons exist? I'd argue no. That is because evidence can only prove what does exist and what has happened, thats what people don't seem to understand. It cannot prove that something does not exist, or never happened. Theists like to claim: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That's true, 150 years ago we had no evidence of black holes and now we do. I would postulate however that if the evidence is absent there is no rational reason to accept a claim. If someone can present good evidence of a god I'll start believing but until then I reject the claim on the basis of the evidence not supporting it, therefore I don't believe there is a god. That is atheism. , keep note that doesn't address whether or not I know there is a god or not. That is what gnosticism and agnosticism address, and from that point I would argue everyone is an agnostic because no one can truly know if there really is a god or not. Anyone telling you otherwise is dishonest.

"It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." -William Kingdon Clifford
Do some reading up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freethought


----------



## cookie_thief (Sep 12, 2012)

I'm agnostic. I don't deny the _possibility_ of God. Though I believe the possibility of God is highly unlikely, I won't be surprised if I am extremely wrong.

With that said, I know many NF/SFs that are hard atheists and would fight me on the smallest possibility that God exists.


----------



## killemdeader (Dec 22, 2012)

nreynolds1990 said:


> I think that you have a warped view of what atheism is. I'm sure there are atheists that subscribe to what you just described, not all atheists are the same. But the majority of atheists I have run into believe the same thing as me. Atheism addresses the issue of belief not knowledge. In regards to the question at hand there are two positions: There is a god and there is no god. Both theism and atheism only address the proposition that there is a god. Much like in a court case the only proposition addressed is guilt, not innocence. In a court case you can vote guilty meaning that there is enough evidence to support the accusation against the defendant. Or you can vote not guilty, meaning that there is not enough evidence to support the accusation against the defendant. Not guilty doesn't mean innocent though, it just means that the evidence does not support the accusation. It is up to the prosecution, the one making the positive claim to prove guilt. It is not the responsibility to the defense to prove innocence only to show that the prosecution's evidence doesn't add up or that the prosecution really has no case at all. The burden of proof is on the prosecution not the defense.
> 
> Much in the same way, theists are making a positive claim and atheists reject the claim saying that theists have not met their burden of proof. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence. I and many atheists are not saying there is no god or that there is no possibility that any can exist, we are voting not guilty on the existence of god because the evidence isn't. there. Therefore we don't believe in a god because of the lack of evidence. Same reason that I and likely you don't believe in invisible purple dragons. The evidence for the existence of purple dragons is scant, can you honestly say there is no way, no possibility, invisible purple dragons exist? I'd argue no. That is because evidence can only prove what does exist and what has happened, thats what people don't seem to understand. It cannot prove that something does not exist, or never happened. Theists like to claim: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That's true, 150 years ago we had no evidence of black holes and now we do. I would postulate however that if the evidence is absent there is no rational reason to accept a claim. If someone can present good evidence of a god I'll start believing but until then I reject the claim on the basis of the evidence not supporting it, therefore I don't believe there is a god. That is atheism. , keep note that doesn't address whether or not I know there is a god or not. That is what gnosticism and agnosticism address, and from that point I would argue everyone is an agnostic because no one can truly know if there really is a god or not. Anyone telling you otherwise is dishonest.
> 
> ...


I agree with pretty much everything you said, but from what you are saying, I would consider what you agnostic _leaning_ atheist, as opposed to atheist. I think there is an absence of a consensus of what atheism _means, _which makes it hard to argue my viewpoint against atheism, when your definition of atheism encompasses what I would consider agnosticism, which is a group I am a part of. My definition of atheism, when used without any other descriptors, describes someone who actively believes there are no gods. Your description doesn't really fit the dictionary definition of atheism, _"One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods", _which isn't an attack on your beliefs or perspective; I just think the word atheism is used WAY WAY WAY WAY WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too liberally.


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

KateMarie999 said:


> I always sort of thought a feeler would want to feel like they're not alone out there, like there's someone watching over them. I guess that was a misconception.


Personally, I do want to feel that way. Yet, I don't because there's just no good evidence to think that. And by "good", I mean consistently measurable.



killemdeader said:


> My definition of atheism, when used without any other descriptors, describes someone who actively believes there are no gods. Your description doesn't really fit the dictionary definition of atheism, _"One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods", _which isn't an attack on your beliefs or perspective; I just think the word atheism is used WAY WAY WAY WAY WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too liberally.



I think, among themselves, atheists label what you describe here as "explicit atheism". By constrast, "implicit atheism" does not deny the possibility of a God/Gods/higher spiritual power, but rather consciously rejects it until there is concrete evidence. This view also includes people who have never heard of the concept of God, and thus have no way to accept or reject the idea. Some actually label this as "agnostic atheism", while other atheists think that "agnostic atheism" is just a branch of implicit atheism; it just depends on whom you're asking. Generally, however, agnosticism bases itself on the limits of human reason. They feel that the concept of God/Gods/a higher power is beyond human reasoning or humans are currently too limited in knowledge to comprehend God. And finally,deism, is in a sort of indifference to whether God exists or not; the natural world is enough.


Quoting myself from the thread "Are INFP's and ENFJ's all religious?". I edited some of it since I originally posted it:




surgery said:


> I started a major in Comparative Religion about a year ago. Since then I've been taking classes on Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism from a historical perspective. I've also done a lot of independent research in Hinduism.
> 
> In the course of a year, I have come to outright reject the existence of YHWH/Allah. I don't believe for a second that anything eternally conscious or perfect would create or even inspire texts such as the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, the Book of Mormon, etc. To me, expression of divinity in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) is completely relative to the time and location of a specifics Bronze age mindsets. For example, it's clear from the way scripture itself describes God that he has a body (sacrifices are described as his food; their scent pleases him; he walks in the Garden of Eden and interacts with Adam and Eve outside of it; humans were created in his "image", which is an ambiguous term) yet to other parts of scripture, he doesn't always appear to people in bodily form (the burning bush; the Ten Commandments on Mt. Sinai) which theologians make sense of by explaining that the sight of God would literally destroy people. Even still, that assumes that God has some tangible essence. Many people of various religions, think that God is somehow everywhere and nowhere, which immediately puts God beyond human reasoning. We're limited to what God chooses to reveal to us, which is why people accept prophecy, etc. However, all the religions have contradictory information in their revelations. So, how can we humans discriminate between them? There's no reason to believe one over than other than just because you want to, ie faith.
> 
> ...


----------



## nreynolds1990 (Jan 8, 2012)

killemdeader said:


> I agree with pretty much everything you said, but from what you are saying, I would consider what you agnostic _leaning_ atheist, as opposed to atheist. I think there is an absence of a consensus of what atheism _means, _which makes it hard to argue my viewpoint against atheism, when your definition of atheism encompasses what I would consider agnosticism, which is a group I am a part of. My definition of atheism, when used without any other descriptors, describes someone who actively believes there are no gods. Your description doesn't really fit the dictionary definition of atheism, _"One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods", _which isn't an attack on your beliefs or perspective; I just think the word atheism is used WAY WAY WAY WAY WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too liberally.


The only tenet of atheism is lack of belief in at least one god. Lack of belief in deities, that is atheism thats all thats it. If you think that is a broad term it is. There are a lot of different kinds of atheists, weak atheists, strong atheists, freethinking atheists, agnostic atheists, even some buddhist sects are actually atheistic in nature. I don't consider myself an agnostic, to me agnosticism implies not being able to make up your mind about something, you're undecided. I was an agnostic for a while but I have since made up my mind. I don't believe in the existence of god(s) therefore I am an atheist. Now can I actually say there absolutely 100% no god and there can be no possibility for one to exist? I can't tell you that, thats an unprovable claim. What I can do is examine the available evidence and come to a conclusion based on that which is what I have done. Atheism actually describes what somebody is not, thats why its so broad. Some would argue its a bad term because we generally don't describe people in terms of what they are not but what they are. Example we don't refer to people in general as non-Christians or non-Muslims or non-Wiccans etc. thats a very broad brush you're right. If I was to pick a term to describe what I am, its the term I gave you before, a freethinker, not an agnostic


----------



## cheburashka (Jan 4, 2013)

i was an agnostic for a very long time but i'm leaning more and more towards atheism. there have been a lot of others saying this already so i'll just pop in and say that yes there are lots of nf atheists!


----------



## moondog (Oct 3, 2012)

Depends on my mood really. I'd offer smoke and blood to the gods if they would send me something a little more captivating than a mundane life. Was waiting on Aphrodite to send a voluptuous women my way for the winter season but all I found was an abandoned puppy. Going to have to god harder than that to get me to offer coin at your temple you bastards!

I suppose I don't really take the whole religious thing seriously but certainly have a sense of spirituality due to being human and operating at a maximum INFP mode. I have my fair share of dislike towards atheist, agnostic, spiritual, and religious types equally but it usually depends on the person.

Besides if I go full atheist how am I going to sell my soul to the blue devils and learn to play the guitar?


----------



## Jilau (Mar 25, 2012)

I'm agnostic leaning toward atheism. The reason I don't call myself atheist is that while I don't believe in the christian god, I do believe in some kind of higher power, whatever that may be. Most atheists I know of are all "No, ONLY science and proof! Everything else is bullshit!" While not every atheist is like that, I still don't want people to associate me with that kind, since I'm quite spiritual and open-minded.


----------



## Tacedhyse (Nov 9, 2012)

I'm a very ardent Atheist and skeptic of anything pertaining to pseudoscience or the supernatural. I'm curious to know why F denotes more of a likelihood to turn to religion than T? I know both of many Ts who are religious (mainly TJs) and many Fs (particularly FPs) who are irreligious or outright atheists. I do think that Ts are more likely to be full-on skeptics of anything supernatural, though, because in my experience with the skeptic movement it seems to be predominantly dominated by Thinking types, although of course I could be making a hasty generalization.

Also, I think many Atheists (myself, included) are "technically" Agnostic, in that we can't know with absolute certainty that there are no deities (although I'm virtually positive a theistic one is almost certainly a myth) but we don't want to be included amongst the hijacked meaning of the word Agnostic, which oftentimes indicates religious moderation; in other words, that without evidence everyone is equally correct, as though there were a 50/50 chance between all opinions and that all beliefs deserve equal consideration and respect - which I think is ridiculous. I feel that I fit far more in with the Atheist train of though than I do with most of the openly Agnostic people I encounter.


----------



## ToxicatedRose (Apr 18, 2012)

I think I'm a weak atheist, but I really think the human race has better things to bicker about.


----------



## Alediran (Aug 31, 2011)

I'm agnostic more than a true atheist. While I am against most forms of monotheistic organized religions I do feel sympathy for the nature-based like Druidism and Wicca, for the philosophical like Taoism and Buddhism, and for the polytheistic religions with many interesting gods and stories (the egipitian, the greco-roman, the norse, the celt).

For me a "god" (if you want to call it that way), is not an anthropomorphic figure with the capacity for rational thought, but a force of nature, just like there is no separate places like heaven and hell, they are all "here" at the same time and it's our actions that determine if "here" is more heavenly or hellish.

I do think there is an "afterlife", every single atom and unit of energy that compose our bodies were something else not long ago (last night's dinner will become part of your body in short time), even the most quiet sound we produce was once part of us. This is because the First Law of Thermodynamics is: "energy is neither created nor destroyed", which also applies to matter, since E=MC[SUP]2[/SUP]. Therefore when we "die" we just become something else. Just thinking that the water in your body has millions of years and has probably been all over the Earth is enough to understand this. And that is small potatoes when you begin to think that every part of you was there when the Big Bang happened.

That I was I believe in, the mind-blowing spiritual side of what science has discovered.


----------

