|
|
||
 Who are neither theist nor atheist, but religious?
Drishtantoism
is a Philosophy that
is neither for Theism nor for Atheism. That
means, the philosophy doesn’t advocate for traditional Beliefs those
are of both theistic and atheistic. It says for such type of religion that
admits the acting according to the rules and regulations of the nature. As
atheist akshay
kumar datta, opposing religious belief Shobuj Taposh did not
take the equation: work = crops, worship + work = crops, therefore worship =
0. So Drishtantoist religion is different from both theistic and atheistic Religions. What
is the Drishtantoist religion? According to the philosophy, a man’s natural
and biological behavior is his religion. Here Faith is
avoided. Shobuj Taposh claimed: if a man is devoted to his body and nature,
he needs no faith. Nature
means a man’s surroundings. Homeland is mainly considerable. The philosophy
avoids faith, as it loves man. But faith is contempt to a man. Because of
remaining the matter of ‘slavery’ and ‘mastery’ here, the philosophy doesn’t
receive it cordially. Besides, being near at belief, faith is to a great
extent God-based. But because of being neither for theist nor for atheist,
the philosophy avoids God. It loudly claims that for presenting explanation
of the origin of the Universe,
there is no need to know the existence of God. And it
also claims that for doing good work, a man must not have theistic or
atheistic view. To Shobuj Taposh, if a man is devoted to his body and nature,
he must be sympathetic to the world, must neglect otherness. In this sphere,
the philosophy is near at Postcolonialism.
In Drishtantoism, Patriotism
is accepted as main religion. Through patriotism a man can be a
philanthropist.
|
||
|
|
||
|
I think, you
overcomplicate it and pose a wrong question.
Agnosticism
is the view that the truth values of
certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, as well as other religious and metaphysical claims—are unknown and (so
far as can be judged) unknowable.[1][2][3] Agnosticism can be defined in various
ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some
senses, agnosticism is a stance about the difference between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific
claim or belief. In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither
believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve,
respectively.[2] In the
strict sense, however, agnosticism is the view that humanity does not currently
possess the requisite knowledge and/or reason to provide sufficient rational
grounds to justify the belief that deities either do or do not exist.
Basically,
agnostic is not a follower of any religion (see your question) but does not
deny existence of a deity (see your question).
Secondly,
your question is illogical.
Who are
neither theist nor atheist, but religious?
Being
religious already assumes belonging to a certain deity worship, aka religion.
What you may have wanted to ask, is who is neither atheist, no theist, but has FAITH? As there is huge difference between religion and faith. As I, eg, have FAITH though I am above any religion. Or atheism for that matter. |
||
|
|
||
|
Quote:
Drishtantoism is different from Agnosticism. The philosophy avoids God Without doubting it. |
||
|
|
||
|
In brief:
Drishtantoism is a philosophy that is neither for theism nor for atheism. But
it trusts that man is naturally religious. C. G. Jung said, “Our mind
(psyche) is, by nature, religious”. To me, his claim is theistic. Because he,
depending on his cognition/feeling at the time of speaking on dream, said, “I
find that all my thoughts circle around God like the planets around the sun,
and are as irresistibly attracted by Him. I would feel it to be the grossest
sin if I were to oppose any resistance to this force” (quoted it from his
autobiography, ”’Memories, Dreams and Reflections”’). By hook or by crook,
Stephen Hawking also showed his theistic view, though he is known as an
atheist to thinkers. Hawking said, “the universe is governed by the laws of
science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to
break the laws.” Drishtantoism doesn’t advocate for traditional beliefs those
are of both theistic and atheistic.
As
Bengali atheist philosopher AKSHAY KUMAR DATTA, opposing religious belief I
don’t except the equation: work = crops, worship + work = crops, therefore worship
= 0. The philosophy follows the equation: God + Allah = there is nothing,
though theist and atheist will/may say that the equation is the crop of
bizarre thought and God+ Allah= 0 respectively. To say mathematically, God +
God = 2God (If Allah = God), or Allah + Allah = 2Allah (If God = Allah), and
to say synthetically it might be ‘God + Allah = Gallohad’. But Allah cannot
be God. It is believed that Allah has sent The Quran, and God has sent the
Bible. If the Quran and the Bible are not the same matter, God is not equal
to Allah. So God + Allah = there is nothing (‘nothing’ not amounting to 0).
Moreover, because of being a number, the sum total of the two may not be 0.
Again God ≠ Allah. Because all the Christians do not regard the Quran, do not
believe Allah; and hence do not maintain the Eid festivals. In reverse order,
all the Muslims do not regard the Bible, do not believe God; and hence do not
maintain the Christmas Day. For this, Drishtantoism doesn’t give importance
to any divine/Godly matter.
So to
speak that Drishtantoist religion is different from both theistic and
atheistic religions. What is the Drishtantoist religion? According to the
philosophy, a man’s natural and biological behavior is his main religion.
Here faith is avoided.
re·li·gion
[ri-lij-uh n] Show IPA
noun 1. a
set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially
when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies,
usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a
moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
So you have man’s
natural and biological behavior as supreme agency of the universe? I
can see that, considering that it was developed by a poet and has surrealism
mixed in. Just making sure I did not miss on something important.
What do you
mean "avoids God without doubting it"? Doubting God, or doubting
God's existence? System has to have some sort of belief that explains the
world, the human, the nature, the intelligence, everything. I am not sure I
get the base line. To a monotheist, like Christian or Muslim, God is
everything and everything is of God. ANY religion known has some sort of a
"godhead" type consept that at least attempts to explain the
universe and bring any meaning to it. Man's natural behavior just does not
work that way, as I can see it's workings daily. Sure enough, something's restricting
that behavior, or world woud have been to its end long time gone.
|
||
|
|
||
|
And btw, in my vocabulary,
FAITH is the ultimate conviction in something, without godhead figure
involved.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Quote:
The
philosophy avoids God. It loudly claims that for presenting
explanation of the origin of the Universe, there is
no need to know the existence of God.
And it also claims that for doing good work, a man must not have theistic or
atheistic view.
Here,
Avoids = doesn’t
give importance
Without
doubting = without questioning, or without taking as a skeptical matter.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Lol @
Drishtantoism and its attempts to evade the relevant question. You are either
theist or atheist--on this issue, I stand with George H Smith. It is a
dichotomy that is unavoidable. But the aforementioned was clueless about why
his own logic worked...the science behind it. So mystic bull**** like that
which you cite (Drishtantoism) is a couple steps removed from reality...first
you have to philosophically sort out the relevant issues, then you have to
scientifically explain why these stances even exist...everything's
explainable
|
||
|
|
||
|
Quote:
That's fine with me. I do not have faith in any deity mySelf. So, basically, this philosophy avoids looking
into the most important
question ever, and pretends it does not exist. Fair enough. Thank you.
|
||
|
|
||
|
In my mind,
I divide the subject into two parts, the religious and the spiritual...
and have my own peculiar meanings for the two words.
To me,
"Religion" means an organized, earthbound institution formed by men
(though they always claim to be started by god, of course) which people use
as a psychological anchor and help-group to make everyday life easier. It has
it's pros and cons, but religion is ultimately NOT "spiritual"
per-se and often flat-out wrong. I reject the standard religious view of god
and afterlife as hopelessly naive and juvenile.
"Spirituality"
to me means that intangible, greater mystery of what lies beyond our everyday
human perspective. I don't pretend to know or comprehend what lies beyond my
perspective; I couldn't know any more than a snail could comprehend the
physical universe... but I somehow know there are higher perspectives
nevertheless and continually try to comprehend the incomprehensible in my own
limited ways.
I expect to
blink out when I die... but I do hope someone higher up in the universe will
take pity on me and lift my mind up to their perspective when the time comes.
I guess that
makes me a "Spiritual Atheist" of sorts.
|
||
|
|
||
|
The dead.
Now that they are dead and have seen God (or are in hell), they certainly
have some sort of "religion" but cannot be described as either
"theist" or "atheist" because both are based on faith (or
the lack thereof) and cannot exist when the fact is known; because you cannot
have faith in something you already know. Faith is belief or disbelief in
something which you do not yet know. Once you know it, it is not called
"faith" but rather "knowledge".
|
||
|
|
||
|
Quote:
No. Faith is belief in
something in the absence of evidence. Disbelief is declining to believe
something in the absence of evidence. They are opposites.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Sounds a lot
like Pantheism to me, which reveres nature and allows most of
its adherents to find their own meaning of God and all they hold dear in life
in the Natural world. Yet, it neither includes or precludes a God in its
philosophy. Its up to the individual as to whether they believe in a personal
God (theist) or a non-personal, Designer-type God (deist) or even not be sure
that a God is needed (agnostic.)
Most of your
Native American religions would probably be put into this category if you
insisted on pigeonholing them into the vocab of a Comparative Religions
scholar.
Don't
over-complicate things, bro. I think what you described with your
Drishtantoism
is only a Middle Eastern (Indian?) term for Pantheism.
Personally,
I get the vast majority of my soul-feeding and meditation done when amidst
nature. I would have no trouble calling myself a Pantheist--and in
fact do at at times.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Quote:
Drishtantoism
is different from Pantheism. Pantheism advocates for a God-mixed Nature. But
Drishtantoism advocates only for nature. In the philosophy, god is totally
avoided.
|
City-Data.com
এতে সদস্যতা:
পোস্টগুলি (Atom)
কোন মন্তব্য নেই:
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন