over-intellectualization

My almost-atheism (recursive agnosticism is a better descriptor) is visceral. I have learned to not use my rationality as a mask for that plain human state(ment). cn

You failed to suggest how atheism might be an example of intellectualization. It seems to me to be a coping mechanism which gives the illusion of helping, but only serves to distract from the emotional aspect of the conflict.

If I am told I have cancer and rather than deal with the emotional aspect of the situation, I make charts and graphs demonstrating the survival chance, I am intellectualizing. I am appearing to embrace the situation but all I am really doing is avoiding feeling emotional.

How is atheism like this? The intellectual aspects of atheism seem very relevant, in fact integral, to the stance. What emotions would be avoided? Fear, uncertainty, inadequacy? Most of the atheists I know accept these emotions as being part of atheism. Atheism, after all, is saying that we are not convinced, we don't have answers. If emotions are the topic, it would seem atheists show courage rather than defensiveness.

To be quite frank, if we are talking defense mechanisms, this one sounds familiar.

Fantasy - when used as a defense mechanism, is the channeling of unacceptable or unattainable desires into imagination.

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

You failed to suggest how atheism might be an example of intellectualization. It seems to me to be a coping mechanism which gives the illusion of helping, but only serves to distract from the emotional aspect of the conflict.

If I am told I have cancer and rather than deal with the emotional aspect of the situation, I make charts and graphs demonstrating the survival chance, I am intellectualizing. I am appearing to embrace the situation but all I am really doing is avoiding feeling emotional.

How is atheism like this? The intellectual aspects of atheism seem very relevant, in fact integral, to the stance. What emotions would be avoided? Fear, uncertainty, inadequacy? Most of the atheists I know accept these emotions as being part of atheism. Atheism, after all, is saying that we are not convinced, we don't have answers. If emotions are the topic, it would seem atheists show courage rather than defensiveness.

To be quite frank, if we are talking defense mechanisms, this one sounds familiar.

Fantasy - when used as a defense mechanism, is the channeling of unacceptable or unattainable desires into imagination.

...intellectualization applies to atheism, it appears to be the basis of it. Reason is a tool of the whole mind - and is not what makes the world whole. Some things cannot be interpreted with our natural mind. Eros mind / the vegetive body does not rely on reason to create nature. The simple fact is, you have more than one mind. In atheism, I find it is too lopsided with respect to denying other 'minds' that are within. What's the point of exploration if you cut off parts that want to explore as well? (on their own terms)

Originally Posted by eye exaggerate

In atheism, I find it is too lopsided with respect to denying other 'minds' that are within. What's the point of exploration if you cut off parts that want to explore as well? (on their own terms)

I think we should change the term to skepticism at this point, unless you mean to suggest that the possible existence of these other minds is necessarily validation of theism.

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

I think we should change the term to skepticism at this point, unless you mean to suggest that the possible existence of these other minds is necessarily validation of theism.

...could be. The three brains are a 'fact' of life (supported by many, in the same 'trust' as peer review would provide). Theism (in depth - and as far as I know) 'allows' for communication at that level. This is a form of meditation, to let the images come, and from there let them 'stew' until they 'create' something for us. To communicate 'with' these minds is the basis of theology, 3 - the triune nature of reality (so to speak)

I think I understood what you meant, if not, please let me know.

Originally Posted by eye exaggerate

...could be. The three brains are a 'fact' of life (supported by many, in the same 'trust' as peer review would provide). Theism (in depth - and as far as I know) 'allows' for communication at that level. This is a form of meditation, to let the images come, and from there let them 'stew' until they 'create' something for us. To communicate 'with' these minds is the basis of theology, 3 - the triune nature of reality (so to speak)

I think I understood what you meant, if not, please let me know.

But the payoff is a virginal porn star in a foil bikini and epic hair. cn

Originally Posted by cannabineer

But the payoff is a virginal porn star in a foil bikini and epic hair. cn

^ that was awesome!

Originally Posted by eye exaggerate

...could be. The three brains are a 'fact' of life (supported by many, in the same 'trust' as peer review would provide). Theism (in depth - and as far as I know) 'allows' for communication at that level. This is a form of meditation, to let the images come, and from there let them 'stew' until they 'create' something for us. To communicate 'with' these minds is the basis of theology, 3 - the triune nature of reality (so to speak)

I think I understood what you meant, if not, please let me know.

You seem to have caught my drift.

If I am catching yours, you are saying that it is unfair, or an error, to dismiss theisism without exploring these other aspects of the mind. Someone who dismisses theism based on logical and empirical grounds takes a position where it is impossible to have all the information.

This is something I will ponder, but for now I think it's reasonable to say you are proposing a possible oversight rather than pointing out manifestations of the defense mechanism known as intelectualization.