|
The word nontheism describes the beliefs of those who do not believe in gods. The Oxford English Dictionary Online defines "Nontheist" as "A person who is not a theist," and "nontheistic" as, "Not having or involving a belief in god...." Webster's Dictionary defines "theism" as, "belief in the existence of God or gods," and says that "non" is a prefix indicating "a person or thing not of the type designated." Thus, "nontheism" refers to not believing in gods. The word is often employed as a blanket term for all terms which are not theistic and yet somehow related to spirituality, including atheism (both strong and weak) and agnosticism, as well as certain Eastern religions like Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism. Nontheism is used somewhat differently by certain liberal theologians—such as Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong and Anglican bishop John A.T. Robinson—who define a "nontheistic God" as "the ground of all being" rather than as a personal divine being (in Greek Θεος). It has been alleged that some author represented in a book edited by Caporale & Grumelli (1971), or perhaps the editors themselves, put another meaning to the word, Nontheism (or non-theism). According to this meaning (possibly a rare or unique meaning?) "nontheism" refers only to weak atheists (not strong atheists) who are like noncognitivists in that they don't concern themselves with evidence for or against gods' existence, and who are like ignostics in that they don't care whether god exists.
Nontheistic (Caporale & Grumelli type) worldview When faced with the question of whether gods exist, a nontheist would respond that the question itself is unimportant, that it concerns information that is unfalsifiable, meaningless, superfluous, etc. To a nontheist, the issue of God's existence is no different than, for example, the existence of invisible, intangible elephants. This conviction is generally based on skepticism and empiricism, although it may also be motivated by the pragmatic desire to rid oneself of an inconvenient and irresolvable dilemma. Additional pragmatic motivations arise from considering the various functions that the concept of a deity serves, and finding those functions either unimportant or unresolved by the concept of a deity. For instance, if one entertains the existence of a deity in order to face concerns over the end of life, then the loss of a concern over the end of life diminishes the need to consider the existence of a deity. Likewise if the concept of a deity provides a resolution to ontological questions such as "how did the universe begin?" then the need for the concept will be lessened to the extent that one no longer finds troubling his or her ignorance about the possible ontology of the universe. In short, if the concept of deity has no functional value for a person, that person is likely to be comfortable as a nontheist. Insentient life, infants, etc. On allegedly rare occasions, the term nontheistic is applied to living beings that are intellectually incapable of establishing any kind of positive or negative opinion about a deity, e.g. animals, fetuses, infants. (Clearly, we are no longer talking about C&G type nontheism.) The term implicit atheism is also used. Such usage is alledgely disputed by some theists, who believe that all creatures are innately theistic (in which case, these alleged theists must believe that butterflys are capable of opining about gods), and that departure from theism constitutes a pathological turn away from nature. Most nontheists (of which types?) reject the latter belief, since they presume belief in a deity to be a mere social construction, with no relation to nature and biology. (This is describing strong atheists, those who believe gods are not real. It says, in effect that most nontheists are strong atheists. Since strong atheists are excluded by definition from C&G nontheism, it must be talking about regular nontheism, in which case it is saying that strong atheists outnumber weak atheists, which claim ought to be backed up if it is to be made at all.) Nontheism in philosophy A large number of philosophers have historically been nontheists, although, for the sake of convenience and comprehension, many of these have publicly categorized themselves as atheists or agnostics (since atheists and most agnostics are nontheists, we're probably back to talking about C&G type nontheism). The most famously nontheistic school were the Logical Positivists (now we must be back to talking about non-C&G nontheists, since strong atheists are excluded by definition from C&G nontheism, and the logical positivists definitely believed it is not true that god exists) and the Analytic philosophers, including Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and A.J. Ayer. The Positivist position, as formulated by Ayer, was that "asking whether God exists is simply not meaningful." The perceived dichotomy between theism and atheism (strong atheism) was merely a case of mutually exclusive suppositions, neither of which could be empirically tested, and neither of which made any kind of meaningful assertion. (as, To a Logical Positivist, a statement like "God exists" is a kind of tautology, since the very concept of a deity is (in the view of the Positivists) inseparable from the assertion that it exists. It would therefore be something like saying "dragons have wings". By the same token, the positive rejection of such a tautology (i.e. "There is no God") would itself be a meaningless tautology, akin to saying "dragons do not have wings". According to the Positivists, neither assertion has meaning, since both involve the creation of a separate entity, one having wings and another not having wings. The fact that neither creature is observable renders the issue meaningless. By recognizing the dilemma of divinity as a similar fallacy, the Positivists hoped to escape the endless cycle of belief and disbelief. (They firmly believed that it's not true that god exists.) Also these claims might have parrels with the claims of Husserl's phonomenology Nontheism in Buddhism The first historically significant nontheist was probably Gautama Buddha, who, when asked whether God existed, or any similar question of metaphysics, usually responded with complete silence (see also mu). These questions became known as the Fourteen Indeterminates.• (It looks like we're back to talking about C&G nontheism.) On one occasion, when presented with a problem of metaphysics by the monk Malunkyaputta, Buddha responded with a story of a man shot with a poisoned arrow. The man's family summons the doctor to have the poison removed, and the man given an antidote:
Although Buddhism has a vast number of scriptures and practices, the fundamental core of Buddhism, the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path, are distinguished in the world of religion as being absent any mention of God(s) or any notion or worship of any deity. They are purely ethical and meditative guidelines based on the truths of psychological suffering due to impermanence. Zen Master Bassui (1327-1387) had strong words for those applying notions of divinity to any separate beings, such as bodhisattvas:
Despite an involved Buddhist cosmology, the creation of Things, along with their attachments and aversions (the illusion of maya), is attributed to ignorance or avidya; and attaining to Buddhahood is the end of such ignorance. This technical emphasis on creation, within the mind, contrasts with the notion of any God initating a cosmological creation story, as in theistic traditions. Nontheism remains a common element of many schools of Buddhism. However, many theologians have argued that Buddhists have merely transferred their theistic devotion to ancestors, bodhisattvas, kami, and other alleged "deity surrogates". Other observers have dismissed these practices as mere folk traditions, analogous to the pagan undertones present in European Christian worship, and not a feature of higher religion. Most modern Buddhist teachers, such as Soyen Shaku and Robert Baker Aitken, avoid addressing the existence or nonexistence of deities, regarding the issue as an indulgence and a distraction. Relationship to Agnosticism Used in the strict sense, as by those who self-identify as (C&G type) nontheists, the term describes worldviews for which the question of divinity is regarded as irrelevant and meaningless. When used in this sense, nontheism is often(?) confused with agnosticism, although there is are obvious differences. An agnostic, by definition, views the question of God's existence to be necessarily unanswered, (that's simply not true) but not necessarily irrelevant. A nontheist, by definition (we're discussing C&G type nontheism here), views the question to be necessarily (what does "necessarily" mean in this context?) irrelevant, and also may or may not find it necessarily unanswerable. Thus, it is possible that an agnostic could consider the nature of God to be an issue of tremendous importance. It is also possible that he could consider the question unimportant. Provided that he remains convinced that the existence of God is unknowable, he remains an agnostic. (This describes strong agnostics, the, "I don't know and you don't know either," variety. Weak agnostics just, themselves, don't know whether there is a god.) Likewise, a (C&G type) nontheist may or may not believe the existence of God to be inherently unknowable; this has no bearing on his status as a nontheist. It is possible that one individual could be both an agnostic and a nontheist; indeed, most nontheists are agnostics, and vice versa. (That's totally nuts. Why would most agnostics adopt the peculiar set of beliefs attributed to C&G nontheists in this article?) Nevertheless, the concepts are distinct, and it is entirely possible that one could be exclusively a nontheist, or exclusively an agnostic. Many early agnostics were not nontheists, in that they considered religious questions to be worthwhile and important. The French Proto-Fascist Charles Maurras, for instance, was an avowed agnostic. However, he was also a staunch clericalist, viewing the Catholic religion as a necessary part of society, and the question of divinity as an integral part of the (typical) human psyche. Maurras could be said to be an agnostic, but not a nontheist. (This paragraph is definitely about C&G nontheists.) Many modern-day atheists could be described as agnostic nontheists, in that they regard the existence of God as both meaningless and unknown. However, an exclusive nontheist avoids the question of God's existence entirely because the question is irrelevant. See also | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||
 |
|
| |