Do atheists and/or agnostics believe in non-deific supernatural events?

[Orion283]

I'm tinkering up a story involving an assortment of protagonists. There'll be a bunch of supernatural stuff going on that the protagonists participate in. I've got representatives for the judeo/christian/islam side, pagans, and some kinda shinto/buddhism mix, and I'm pondering a fourth. Maybe some kinda spirit medium guy. Do agnostics believe supernatural events occur but just don't subscribe to a particular deity's newsletter? (I've always been confused by agnostics.) And do atheists just not believe in the existance of deities, or do they not believe in supernatural events at all?

[tempest_teapot]

Well I'm agnostic and believe in a certain amount of supernatural/spiritual stuff, but I just like to keep an open mind. As you put it, I don't subscribe to a particular deity's newsletter.

[Orion283]

Is agnosticism a group itself or rather a general mindset that there's probably some stuff out there but it's not clear what it is yet?

[vindemiatrix]

I'm an atheist and I don't believe in any supernatural phenomena at all. Or at least, I believe that things can happen which humans, in their lack of knowledge, will attribute to supernatural phenomena, but science will almost always be able to provide an explanation.

[MelancholyBliss]

I'm an atheist in that I don't believe in a supreme power or after life. Straight out don't believe.

But I'm really not that strong of an atheist. I readily admit that my atheist beliefs are fueled by a need to disbelieve in a higher power that allows fucked up shit to happen to people. It's easier for me to be atheist. It stops me from being completely angry and bitter at life's events. It also helps me give credit for those that overcome obstacles rather than believe they were inspired by any kind of deities' graces.

An true agnostic neither believes or disbelieves. It's not a belief in the possibility. The core of agnosticism is that any knowledge of a supreme power, supreme reality, mataphysical or spiritual elements of life are completely unknowable. They don't think "Well, it may be true, or it may not." They think "There's no way to know what's true and what's not." It's not really an idea stating that something is not clear yet. The idea is that it will never be clear. People have their own meaning of agnosticism, but as a general philosophy, that's the idea. It is also not a group or a collective of beliefs. It's more of a personal philosophy.

Personally, despite being an atheist, I may not necessarily believe in certain supernatural or metaphysical phenomena, but I respect it. Just as I respect religion and faith. Just as I appreciate others' prayers and blessings even if I don't believe, I respect the reverence people have for supernatural entities, spirits of ancestors and places, people or objects that hold alleged spiritual or metaphysical energy. For example, I won't pee in the jungle without asking for permission (because that's what my culture believes according to a legend of spiritual ancestors inhabiting the jungles) or I won't do ghost hunting type activities because I don't believe in disturbing the alleged resting places of spirits or ghosts.

[Orion283]

Hrm. So an agnostic spirit medium character is right out then?

[vindemiatrix]

I think it'd be entirely possible to have an agnostic who believes in some form of spiritual afterlife, but maintains that it's impossible to know if there is a God or not. :D So no, not right out at all, imho. ^_^

[MelancholyBliss]

I mean, if you want to get technical, then no. An agnostic wouldn't be able to be a medium if for the core belief that a "true agnostic" believes that there is no way to know if there is some sort of higher power or all of the spiritual or metaphysical concepts that involve something beyond our material plane. If he/she were a medium, that take some sort of belief in something beyond "this world".

The only belief an agnostic "supposed" to have is that we can't know. We don't have the capability of knowing.

If it's a story with people reacting differently to supernatural phenomena, I think the agnostics and atheists will play an important part in offering another side of the story. It can be interesting to have one person say, there is no explanation and there doesn't have to be. Consider agnostics the existensialists of spirituality.

[Orion283]

I should totally put an atheist and/or agnostic on the roster for that one story. Though for this particular gig (a video game, to be specific) I need a character who can play an active role. I can't think of anymore religions though. There must be a bajillion around that I haven't heard of. =0p Although an atheist character in a supernatural action game could be neat. All his special attacks would make the monsters disappear by disbelieving them, and then he'd probably go eat a sandwich or something. =0p

[Shona]

You might want to go for animism. It's the essential basis of any religion, but just that. The base. Everything has a soul. End of discussion.

Or not.

I'm an atheist and I... don't believe in anything at all. I don't believe in supernatural events or deities or souls or anything.

[mcnicks]

I think that the terms "athiest" and "agnostic" are used in lots of different ways by different people. Agnosticism tends to be interpreted as, "open to the possibility of the supernatural" but, to me, that wrongly suggests that athiests are somehow closed. But then, I have also heard agnosticism described as, "unwilling to make a commitment either way" on questions about God and the supernatural.

I find it difficult to talk about the supernatural because, the way I see it, I am not going to believe in anything without some decent evidence and, if there is decent evidence for something, then I am probably going to think that it is therefore part of the natural world and not the supernatural. If there is no evidence for something then I am going to describe it as imaginary rather than supernatural. I guess that might be described as "hard athiesm" ... I don't know if "soft athiesm" exists?

[Shona]

There are atheists that firmly believe that there exists no deities or controllers of destiny but are open to believing supernatural events, like ghosts and the like. I've met a couple.

[Orion283]

Animism sounds like it might be a perfect fit, because the character I have in mind would be a spirit medium sort so he'd be all about talking to souls.

[mcnicks]

Also, I think you can do a lot with metaphors. I have a friend who is a psychiatrist. She is a staunch atheist but she dabbles in astrology and tarot. She says that they give you and the person you are working with a shared language that you can use to talk about your history, your regrets, your dreams, your desires and how you see your future panning out. So you could think of it - animism or whatever else - as a kind of working with symbols to describe and explain peoples' actions.

[Lord of Fools]

I know atheists who believe in ghosts and psychics. Spirits aren't really the same as gods in my view, but then I'm... something not quite atheist, so perhaps that's just me.

[MelancholyBliss]

I know that a lot of atheists who don't believe in God but believe in what people call the "supernatural" actually do it in a natural way. Meaning, what McNicks touched upon. That the existence of spirits or spirit-like energy is actually a very natural thing that doesn't take a belief in God or any kind of higher power or supreme cosmic force governing our lives. It doesn't even take a belief in an afterlife to believe in spirit-like forces.

One explanation they give is of excess life energy, going by the scientific fact that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred. Now, most people believe that the energy that is transferred from the deceased is the energy that, for instance, goes into the soil as a person is buried, eventually absorbed through the coffin, crypts, etc. that fuels the ground than in turn fuels anything that grows from or consumes energy in the ground, etc. That whole circle of life thing. However, there are people who believe that energy exists in a type of cosmic sense and that human life energy, even that not inspired by a belief in a god or diety, is transferred differently than other forms of energy.

[Sammi]

If there is no god, how could the "supernatural" be anything other than natural? For something to be beyond nature, there must be a set boundary for what nature is. That boundary either includes everything, or everything determined by some ultimate moral entity to be "natural". Take out the entity and you have everything being natural (ie, a part of nature). Most people will substitute themselves for said entity (whether they believe in a god or not) and set up their own moral paradigm as representing what is "natural" and "unnatural", but I think that an honest atheist would have to agree that without an ultimate moral entity, nothing can be truly unnatural.

As for "supernatural" phenomena, there are many possible scientific explanations. It's an established fact that the human mind has power. How far that power extends is a matter for debate, but it's there. Assuming for a moment that we could extend our minds beyond our bodies and manipulate reality through non-biological mechanisms, it would not be a very big leap to conjecture that there may be neural patterns floating around not tied to a specific brain. An even more scientifically plausible explanation for the existence of such phenomena would be internal, saying that ghosts are a conjuration of the (collective?) sub-/unconscious. Meeting your grandmother's ghost, then, would be an experience for you to learn about your own mind, just as you might do with Tarot cards or simple meditation.

[Orion283]

Someone else also suggested native americans, which would be cool cause they're big on ancestor's spirits and such. In the game the character would gain certain abilities depending on whose spirit he's channeling at the time.

Are there a whole bunch of native american religions or just a few or just the one?

[MelancholyBliss]

A bunch. There are similarities and parellels between them. Sometimes from tribe to tribe you find the same deities. In general, however, they can be considered separate.

They're also heavily centered around nature and rituals. Their ceremonies and physical practices are a big part of their faith.

[ranzakunwar]

first post...a hello to everyone
i think supernatural has long been used to describe phenomena we couldn't explain with science and our understanding of the physical world.
i personally do not believe in it and my thinking is that there will be a point in time a 100 years from now when some of the most important questions of today will have been answered and new ones posed.
We will just continue on journey of learning and try to satiate our curiosity and hunger for knowledge..
All of course depends on us surviving that long:lol:

[MichaelB]

I think it's dangerous to ask "do atheists believe" or "Do agnostics think". You can't sum up such concepts in sweeping generalisations, every person has a different minset and believes different things.

I think it would be interesting if one of your characters was genuinely negatively capable: they could honestly, sincerely and wholeheartedly believe in a god (or gods) with one part of their mind, but in the same moment be honestly, sincerely and strongly atheistic, not believing in any supernatural events whatsoever. That's what I am, anyway. Although come to think of it, half the reason there are no real negatively-capable characters in fiction is because it's really too hard to describe and still have the semblance of a sane character who isn't an archetypical Zen Monk or Raving Schizophenic.

*slinks off unhelpfully*

[Orion283]

I am both intrigued and baffled by your suggestion. (o.o) Someone who believes and doesn't believe something at the same time?

[Tundra]

It's possible but hard to describe. I was like that for ages.

[JRosemary]

I'm tinkering up a story involving an assortment of protagonists. There'll be a bunch of supernatural stuff going on that the protagonists participate in. I've got representatives for the judeo/christian/islam side, pagans, and some kinda shinto/buddhism mix, and I'm pondering a fourth.

Hi! I have a minor concern for your story:

I'm hoping that you have a representative for Judaism, a representative for Christianity and a representative for Islam, because these are three very different religions, with entirely different cultural feels. Yes, they are related--no question there--but a Jew, a Christian and a Muslim won't view the world, G-d, or the purpose of religion the same way.

Sadly, many Christians think Judaism is just Christianity without any references to Jesus. And many Jews think Christianity is Judaism with a bunch of stuff about Jesus added in. And hardly anybody in the west bothers to find out how Islam differs from both.

As a girl with a degree in religious studies, this pains me. :wall:

Meanwhile, it's fine to have just a Christian representative, if that's the one you're familiar with. You don't have to try to squeeze in the other two. And if you do have one reference character for each of these three, feel free to ignore this post!

[MichaelB]

William Bion described it as thus: "I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason". Basically, I can afford to have two mutually exclusive truths honestly and wholeheartedly embraced in my philosophy, and not need to justify it. most people, apparently, feel the need to ratiuonalise such contradictions and come up with a definite singular answer. A person who is negatively capable is able to live quite happily within two mutually exclusive pohilosophical mindsets and not be troubled by it. In my case, this appears at a surface level by my 'switching' between worldviews according to present company or mood.

[Orion283]

Hrm... in theory I'd figured the islamic/jewish/christian character would have assorted elements of each so that the player could play him as whichever sort they prefer, maybe even dabbling a little differently on each playthrough. To the best of my knowledge, although they vary on how things should be handled, they all lay claim to the same God and all have the general message of 'do stuff God says and don't be a dick'.

...Which now that I think about it could probably describe almost every religion ever. (-.-)'

I probably could make a whole game with just the I/J/C God peoples teaming up, but I'd rather have the expanded scope of multiple diverse religions teaming up. I wonder though if it'd be offensive to each group to suggest that all of them could be at least partially right at the same time. But then again that's kind of the game's message about religion as a whole.

I could also use allegorical religions but it'd be niftier to stand up and use the real things.

[JRosemary]

Hrm... in theory I'd figured the islamic/jewish/christian character would have assorted elements of each so that the player could play him as whichever sort they prefer, maybe even dabbling a little differently on each playthrough. To the best of my knowledge, although they vary on how things should be handled, they all lay claim to the same God and all have the general message of 'do stuff God says and don't be a dick'.

In my opinion that won't work--not if you want the character to feel authentic. I strongly encourage you to stick with just one.

Yeah, theoretically we have the same G-d, which is great. But we don't talk about or view G-d the same way. Heck, in Judaism it scarcely even matters whether or not you believe in G-d. For Jews, what you do is far more important than what you believe.

In fact, this is a good illustration of what I mean. The notion that whether or not you believe in G-d is a (relatively) minor issue in Judaism is incomprehensible to many Christians. In Christianity, your beliefs are of utmost importance.

You can see this in practice by how each religion divides itself. Branches of Judaism (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, Reconstructionist) tell you roughly what a Jew does; whether she keep kosher, observes the Sabbath, etc.

But a denomination (or variety) of Christianity tells you roughly what a Christian believes: does she believe in the authority of the Pope, does she think the Christian Bible is the only authority, what does she think happens during Communion, does she think it's ok to pray to saints, etc.

Ok, I'm waaaay over-simplyfing. And I haven't even brought in the Muslims. But I think the point holds.

As a Jew, I'd rather read about a genuine Christian or Muslim character than about a character who's supposed to be a conglameration of all three--and therefore doesn't ring true to any of them.

Just my two cents, mind. You may do something brilliant with your conglameration. ;)

[sardonicus]

I don't. Dunno about the others.

[MichaelB]

I agree with Jay-Rose (That could totally bew your rapper name, by the way), I'd rather read about one genuine character than a weak conglomeration of all three.

Unless it was a guy with DID, and each of his dissociative identities strongly and firmly believed in a different religion. That could be interesting.

[JRosemary]

I agree with Jay-Rose (That could totally bew your rapper name, by the way). . .

:lol: I usually spell it 'JRose.'

[MichaelB]

J-Ro: China's answer to Jennifer Lopez. :lol:

[MelancholyBliss]

In my opinion that won't work--not if you want the character to feel authentic. I strongly encourage you to stick with just one.



That would depend on if we're talking about authentic to what those religions are "supposed to be"? Or are we talking about authentic to how human nature is?

Very rarely - especially outside of the most orthodox or clergy - are you going to find a person who follows his or her religion to an authentic degree. If we're talking about people, who largely base their thoughts and actions on all stimuli and not just one (i.e. religion), I'd believe it to be much more authentic for a person to follow, appreciate or believe more in the connection (as opposed to the differences) of all three religions based on their usually limited understanding of them, than to stick to one with the intention of being authentic to the (very, very, very old) religion, itself.

The fact that you referred to how many people think XYZ when, in fact, it's not entirely correct is a sign of its prevalence, and therefor, its authenticity to human nature.

That is, of course, if we are talking about a person's beliefs.

[JRosemary]

That would depend on if we're talking about authentic to what those religions are "supposed to be"? Or are we talking about authentic to how human nature is?

Very rarely - especially outside of the most orthodox or clergy - are you going to find a person who follows his or her religion to an authentic degree. If we're talking about people, who largely base their thoughts and actions on all stimuli and not just one (i.e. religion), I'd believe it to be much more authentic for a person to follow, appreciate or believe more in the connection (as opposed to the differences) of all three religions based on their usually limited understanding of them, than to stick to one with the intention of being authentic to the (very, very, very old) religion, itself.

The fact that you referred to how many people think XYZ when, in fact, it's not entirely correct is a sign of its prevalence, and therefor, its authenticity to human nature.

That is, of course, if we are talking about a person's beliefs.

I think you misunderstand me. I'm saying that not only do beliefs differ, but the whole culture of each religion differs. The feel of a synagogue is different from the feel of a church, which is different from the feel of a mosque. It's not just a question of what individuals believe--which of course can be all over the map.

But, for example, the value placed on beliefs is an aspect of religion: Jews, in general, don't put high value on what you believe, because the religion is focused on what you do.

Christians, in general, do place an enormous significance on beliefs--a significance that doesn't make sense in the context of Judaism. That doesn't mean that every single Christian thinks what you believe is important; it just means that the general Christian culture puts a priority on creeds and such. A priority that simply doesn't exist in Judaism.

EDIT: Hmm, I should probably mention that I know a priest who complains that so many Catholics are more Jewish in their attitude toward beliefs; he says the average American Catholic might as well be Jewish in so far as they think deeds matter much more than creeds. Catholic teaching, I gather, holds that deed and creed should at least be considered of equal importance. Catholics, feel free to correct me.

Here's another cultural thing: according to poll upon poll, the majority of Jews don't believe in an afterlife. The whole idea of an afterlife has never been important to Judaism--and it isn't important to most Jews.

The concept of an afterlife, however, is extremely important in Christianity--so much so that many people think Christianity makes no sense without it. Can you find individual Christians who don't believe in an afterlife? Sure. But they're a minority and they know they're taking a radical departure from the general culture of their relgion.

How you think of yourself is also part of a religious culture. For example, it's hard (not impossible, but hard) to grok the Jewish concept of peoplehood and what it means to be part of this particular people from outside the religion. (Especially since it isn't quite an ethnic thing; there are Jews of every race and background imaginable.) Some Jews thrive on it, some Jews despise it, but for many Jews (and probably most) it's an undeniable part of their heritage.

(A fellow Jew once spent nearly an hour telling me all the ways she wasn't part of the Jewish people. I couldn't help but think that no gentile would ever bother.)

Look, Jews, Christians and Muslims aren't interchangeable. To me, having one person representing all three doesn't make sense.

Now, you can have a character with more than one religious heritage: a Christian Dad, a Jewish Mom or what have you. You can have a character who knows and appreciates all three religions. You can have a character who's starkly different from the religious culture he was raised in. You can have a character who's in a figurative war with his religion. All that's fine.

But it doesn't make sense to me to say: oh, here's some guy who can just represent the entire Judeo-Christian-Islamic religious view. In my opinion, no such person exists . . . and I'd much rather read about someone who was part of just one religious tradition, whether he embraces it, wrestles with it, or both.

[Tundra]

That said... Supernatural Events. I am not religious. However I still get afraid of ghosts. I'm not even sure that they're real but I think I flip between thinking they're real and scoffing that it must surely be able to be explained. usually depending on how afraid I am at the time and what I've been reading about. For some reason, ghosts/spirits seem possible. Not 100% sure I believe in them. And somehow it doesn't really conflict with my ideas about there not being a God. That's what atheism means. Not not believing in any sort of life beyond the grave. But I don't need an afterlife story to live well, and I'm not afraid of the idea of there being nothing. I just don't think anything involves a God.

[Aimless]

Actually, you should just stick with a fairly open-minded Muslim character who's internalised Islam's focus on orthopraxy as well as on orthodoxy. Give him a Jewish beard.

[Scraps 2-point-0]

Atheism comes in many flavors. At heart, all it means is someone who does not believe in any deity. Irreligious atheists I find are the most common, and the militant ones tend to give the rest of us a bad name.

I call myself something of an atheistic-spiritualist. It's not quite deism or agnosticism, but it's similar. Basically, I don't think there's a conscious higher being, but higher powers, not self-aware ones, do exist out there that keep the universe together in transfers of energy. For that, I think reincarnation is possible in some form or another, but not because any god said so. Rather, because it could just be how energy transfers from one life to another. In the end, I think that energy is the thing all religions try to worship, but in different ways, and religion is the culmination of human creativity used to explain things to people in a way that makes sense to their culture.

However, there are atheistic religions. Non-theistic or Humanistic Judaism is fairly commonplace nowadays. Certain sects of Buddhism are atheistic. LeVeyan Satanism is atheistic too, I believe. Jainism (one of my personal favorites) is sometimes considered atheistic as well.

Agnosticism comes in even more flavors than atheism. Typically you'll find three types, though: atheistic, neutral, and theistic agnostics. Agnostics can lean in any number of directions with their views about deities, but claim no knowledge of them. Sometimes you'll also hear weak agnosticism and strong agnosticism referring to the same concepts, because very few people can really be neutral on anything, especially the cosmos. There can be members of any traditionally theistic relationship with weak agnostic views.

Militant atheists and agnostics tend to be the most stereotypical, so unless there's some symbolic significance you're hoping for, I'd honestly steer clear of those, especially if they'll be roaming with more religious people. Although many agnostics go through a militant atheism phase. I had one, but even then I could handle going out with a Catholic who's still my best friend. Militant irreligious atheism doesn't have to be anti-religion entirely, of course, but it's really a whole primordial soup of spectra.