How do you feel towards atheism and atheists?


Atheists are people who have fallen into the same mind trap that religion(ists) have. They are people who have bought into the apparent infernal duality of existence and can’t handle it. They then arrive at the polemic conclusion “there is no God” (in just the same way the fundamentalists chant there is only MY God). Both are of course wrong because they have not acknowledged their innate divinity (or demon-ness, depending upon your perspective).


If I find the right athiests they can be fun when I feel like poking fun at things. Some tend to not take things too seriously.


i prefer laveyan satanists to atheists.


They are atheists, just edgy.


They are atheists who move away from the Christian mindset.


Haven’t… all atheists moved from the christian mindset?


Well, don’t they (Lvyn) just invert the Christian mindset?

So they’re still being defined by Christianity.


I don’t know, I resonate with a lot of atheists. I also have a skeptical streak, also hate religion, and really like listening to some atheists like Sam Harris, who has some interesting stuff out there.

Some do go too far and I could never believe in there being nothing after death, but I resonate with their worldview overall.


Believing is seeing and seeing is believing.

No atheist has ever seen because they’re mindlessly ignorant to what is directly in front of their eyes.


Exactly- they work hard to brush any “proof” off, can’t stand it.


(Just realized I sort of wrote a novel here… Hope it adds some fun to the discussion!)

(Also, this should be a general topic reply, not to Melekoth. Blame Canada)

I feel like there’s a gradient with them. I’m fine with most but some are responsible for the “Only an intellectual could say something so stupid” Meme that’s around. Most intellectuals are cool. Some only sound like them because they’re complete idiots that use big words.

Some atheists are holding on to their ass with both hands and using it as a way to transmute fear of the huge questions into something they can go on the offensive against. Those are fun.

Then there’s the types whose minds don’t generally go to the big stuff. They’re perfectly content going “Cartesian dualism? Fuck it, let’s go bowling” and haven’t gazed into the abyss long enough to really feel the significance of it. They’re often passionate about something mechanistic and completely unrelated and that’s what I connect with when I kick it with them. They’re fine by me but the conversations with them are sort of limited in a certain aspect. I can connect with most people but I feel it’s missing something.

Then sometimes it’s like trying to have a conversation and find commonality in a court room where they insist you need credentials to qualify your cause and effect understanding that dropping a pen will make it fall to the ground. “How do you know!? Do you have a Ph.D. in Theoretical Physics?!” These interactions bother me because you should be able to reference common sense and life experience. Probably why I’m not a lawyer.

I like to test fringe ideas (like magick) and if they work I explore further. Some love to get off on skepticism for it’s own sake. Even if you can completely explain the process behind how something works they’ll still insist that because you don’t have a pedigreed credential and/or a source that whatever you’re saying is irrelevant and then treat you like you’re a fringe conspiracy theorist.

I’ve got an ex girlfriend like this. She was immersed in getting her 3rd science degree (never left college after graduation, just kept going) and I’m an autodidact who just studies because it’s fun to me. She has multiple sclerosis and I’d been studying neurobiology and biotechnology in my spare time. Given that her case was relapsing-remitting there was a window that was workable because the disease isn’t on full assault all the time.

I got to a point where I had a supplement that’s been shown to drastically increase NGF, BDNF, and myelination (all extremely desirable things when your nervous system is attacking itself.)

I also found a full fledged program on Neuro Developmental Therapy that could potentially ensure she’d be able to walk for the rest of her life if my hypothesis was correct. It posed nearly zero downside, was based on decades of Russian pharmacological research and the leading edge of kinesiology and had the potential to stop her prognosis from getting worse.

Her answer to even considering trying it alongside her medication? “I’m not going to take any of your “get swole bro” supplements! You think my neurologist is full of shit and I’m only going to do what the medical community has verified as a treatment for the condition. It’s arrogant to think they wouldn’t have explored this option. I’m not going to even entertain this. The research field is huge and if it was a viable option they’d already be prescribing it to people.”

She’s in her 30’s and still lives with her parents and my company went international last year. If you want results, some ways of thinking are better than others.

I think it’s just lazy trolling sometimes just to make you find shit (“oh yeah? Prove it! Hahahahaha, now prove that!” Ad Nauseam until you come up with something they don’t like and then you’re suddenly “hateful”…) Reminds me of “that kid” in every Philosophy 1010 class ever.

I’ve got a friend who defaults to the Devil’s Advocate position nearly every time i talk about anything. He sees it as “strengthening the position as you go” while I’m following an idea to it’s logical conclusion to see if it should be tested at all. It’s infuriating because when I test something it’s in the real world. They won’t even attempt a go at progress based on how a particular premise is phrased.

Getting said athiest friend to try a sigil (which he got an amazing result from) was like pulling teeth. They still don’t want to explore the rabbit hole because reasons

I think there’s definitely archetypes of how people think and approach things. Oddly there’s a HUGE amount of INTP’s (represent!) on this board and we all had some story that lead us to the occult. I think the way we approach thinking itself is in common and is part of why we all view existence through this particular lens.

Tul;Dur - I think there’s archetypes for styles of thought process and there’s commonalities that lead people to Athiesm, Occultism, Religion, and general douchebaggery. Often there’s a feeling of superiority despite having gaping flaws that “maybe ‘they’ hadn’t considered an idea yet.”


They have the same attitude as hardcore believers of any religion do, they try and push it in your face and criticize everything that doesn’t align with their own personal beliefs. I have one friend that shares probably 10 atheist related memes a day on Facebook. I would never share anything occult related or even talk to people about it, as its my own personal beliefs and idc what anyone else thinks.


Just use harmless magick to scare the shit out of them repeatedly.


I fucking hate the guy and im of a metaphysical atheist bent not to be confused with plain old ‘atheist’.


I had to stop watching when he tried to describe how a skate (a type of fish) would look if it had been designed. It wasn’t an opinion based on scientific data at that point but rather his own idea of what a skate should look like if it were designed by him, because he described his idea of a perfectly designed skate. I read a bit of his book the God delusion, which a lot of atheists raved about and suggested I read it but I read through the first chapter and had to put it down because he began talking about the blind watchmaker argument.


I’m married to one. An engineer on top of that. For a looong time. He was always accepting of my magick. Over the last couple of years, I’ve had him help me with rituals once in a while. Now he’s seen some stuff and he’s thinking. In his opinion it might be something science has not solved yet, but he is slowly coming to the dark side :joy:


He’s such a troll. :joy:

Now bare in mind that Dawkins is no physicist either, but he’s very persistent about discussing the origins of the universe in his works from a “evolutionary” perspective, which is just reaching at that point.

I like it better when atheists and nonbelievers ignore god and religion because that just makes more sense. They appear oddly suspicious when they become very preachy almost to the point of obcession.


As if science weren’t controlled.

A masculine, “left-brained” dominant society serves the elite well.


Yeah nothing wrong with that, because Masculine energy is about control. Any side or group can utilize masculine energy not just the Elite.


The issue of people who talk about evolution is that they don’t seem to get that man isn’t some animal and the evolution isn’t some set thing. They seem to think humans evolved once and that’s it, not realizing that every age we evolve further and further. They’re like creationists in that manner.