Types and Religion

[sema sahin]

Do you think certain types have a propensity towards certain religions?

[Creepy-male]

SLIs and IEEs probably go for something like secular humanism. Alpha NTs for atheism.

I think there's no neat pattern to superimpose over Socionics wrt religion, though. For those that are indoctrinated at an early age, probably only Alpha NTs would "convert" to atheism (or a satire religion). For those that pick up or develop their spiritual beliefs later, it's most likely going to be out of worldview and who the individual is in contact with. Obviously the former can be influenced by type.

[sema sahin]

SLIs and IEEs probably go for something like secular humanism. Alpha NTs for atheism.

I think there's no neat pattern to superimpose over Socionics wrt religion, though. For those that are indoctrinated at an early age, probably only Alpha NTs would "convert" to atheism (or a satire religion). For those that pick up or develop their spiritual beliefs later, it's most likely going to be out of worldview and who the individual is in contact with. Obviously the former can be influenced by type.

Yeah, I've really noticed that pattern with NTs...it seems that almost always happens...hmm...My husband is very odd though...He's an NT and he became Muslim on his own. (:

[Cyrano]

SLIs and IEEs probably go for something like secular humanism. Alpha NTs for atheism.

I think there's no neat pattern to superimpose over Socionics wrt religion, though. For those that are indoctrinated at an early age, probably only Alpha NTs would "convert" to atheism (or a satire religion). For those that pick up or develop their spiritual beliefs later, it's most likely going to be out of worldview and who the individual is in contact with. Obviously the former can be influenced by type.

Gul, Wouldn't xSTx types have a "gotta see it to believe it" perspective?

[Creepy-male]

Gul, Wouldn't xSTx types have a "gotta see it to believe it" perspective?

It depends. I'll drag in my case study to talk about what she feels.

[ArchonAlarion]

I'm sure types have a propensity towards certain religions/non-religion.

However, by that i don't mean "Islam", "atheism", "Buddhism", etc.

It would be very specific religious sects, strains, or sub-philosophies.

[Cyrano]

More on this:

My SLE ex told me that God told him we had to break up. .

He has a fool for a God.

[silverchris9]

It would be very specific religious sects, strains, or sub-philosophies.

Truth. The stereotype that alpha NTs move away from religion is due to the fact that, for quite a while, emphasis in many mainstream religions has been on faith-despite-evidence/traditionalism/not thinking, rather than providing the evidence that supports the religion's claims. There are some very rational religious groups/movements/etc., (tending towards a priori arguments, for obvious reasons) that attract many LIIs and ILEs. Similarly, an IEI might tend towards something resembling gnosticism, mysticism, New Age spirituality, etc., but there are also groups within mainstream religions that very much emphasize the mystery and esoteric aspects of their various conceptions of God/Nature/the Soul/whatever. An EIE might tend towards pentacostalism with its emphasis on emotional expression. An ESE might tend towards groups that emphasize charity/good works (which are important to nearly every religion). Basically, my thought is that one function of religion is explaining how the world is. So, if the explanation is good enough, it ought to be able to translate into any one of the IEs.

Also, I agree that without outside influence an xSTx is likely to tend towards believing whatever they were brought up to believe, but this is easily remedied by a bit of Ni or Ne.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

This is just a rough, general rule but:

IEI: self-help on the most pure level, really putting the SELF in self-help, finding your own unique path, defining what your OWN spiritual path is for you, very liberal, revolutionizing the texts

LSE: Following the rules, dogmatic by-the-book Christianity.

ESE: A more 'nicer' version than the LSE, but still by-the-book and much more conservative and committed then the IEI

LIE: Something that can be objectively true for everybody in the world

IEE: General feel-good stuff. But very democratic and socialized.

INTp (too lazy to look up what the three letter acronym is): Witchcraft, paganism

[Not A Communist Shill]

If I had to choose a religion, I'd choose one with nice quaint churches, no animal sacrifices, strawberry jam, and no dogma...but if I was allowed that selection, I don't see why I'd be forced to choose in the first place! My religion of preference would be Protestantism\Anglicanism, just because that's what I've been used to.

I used to think that atheism was a cold position to have, but now I just appreciate that this is just a basic stance I hold which is naturally contrary to many religions. As for humanism - that can apply to a wide variety of views and I've never felt the need to attach myself to one particular banner!

I do think that fear of not having a religion is a key factor for many people - even now the thought of starting completely from scratch is terrifying to me.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

My religion is shamanism. I'm trying to understand Kabbalah (sp?) right now but it sounds so stupid. Whenever I read about shamanism I get a tingle up my spine and I go THAT'S what I am.

[Logos]

Do you think certain types have a propensity towards certain religions?

Probably not.

[Jarno]

If some of you guys want to become scientologists, (and let's be serious, do you really want to stay mortal or have the chance to become invincible!) then just pay me $ 100.000 and I will make you OT level VI, which is one level above Tom Cruise.

[Brilliand]

Religions can be expressed in ways that different types will be more likely to accept, but as any one large religious group will contain all of the types, every type will have some opportunity to pick it as their favorite.

You could actually get a religious dispute between identicals who each associate the other's religion with their conflictor.

[Kritik]

I can't see INTPs diving too deep into religion. Questioning everything most likely leads you to atheism/agnosticism.

[Kritik]

maybe, that's why I said "most likely", even if there is a pattern there won't be one that covers 100% of people of the same type, but from my experience I haven't met a single deeply religious INTP. A few were on the fence, but none had a blind faith. Still I realize I am guilty of stereotyping because this is based on no more than 10 INTPs.

[Gilly]

Anyone with an active frontal lobe who doesn't have a conditioned need for a higher power is an agnostic or atheist.

[Logos]

Anyone with an active frontal lobe who doesn't have a conditioned need for a higher power is an agnostic or atheist.

::face palm::

[Gilly]

::face palm::

Think I'm some bigoted atheist? Try me.

[marooned]

If some of you guys want to become scientologists, (and let's be serious, do you really want to stay mortal or have the chance to become invincible!) then just pay me $ 100.000 and I will make you OT level VI, which is one level above Tom Cruise.

Send me all the books for free!

Actually what I find funny is that people put the spiritualness into every spirituality. It doesn't matter what they go with... if they pick Scientology or Judaism or whatever... because it will facilitate some ongoing process of revelations and realizations... it's just that they then turn it around and say it's their religion when really it's their mind and it would have done this with any spiritual path... what creates it is giving oneself the opportunity for greater reflection... And *that* is why religion is irrevevant to me. It's shopping for your boat and it doesn't matter which one and since they're all you anyway (since it's inside you) then you don't even need to go boat shopping - you are your boat already.

[Logos]

Think I'm some bigoted atheist? Try me.

I think you're irrational in general. What would trying you prove?

[discojoe]

I think the whole question of religion is irrelevant and that people generally shouldn't even think about it.

[Gilly]

I think you're irrational in general. What would trying you prove?

You wrong :wink:

[Gilly]

I think the whole question of religion is irrelevant and that people generally shouldn't even think about it.

...and, like all other problems, it will just drift away...

[Logos]

You wrong :wink:

Clever.

[Joy]

I think that any type can be involved in any religion, but different types are going to focus on different aspects of the same religion.

LIE: Something that can be objectively true for everybody in the world

That's true for me. It doesn't make sense to me to "believe in" something that is based around a particular culture or historical era. If there is a universal spiritual truth, it has to be equally relevant to everyone.

[Gilly]

Clever.

And irrelevant.

Are you going to elaborate on your facepalm, or just make witticisms and deflections and assume you are right?

[Logos]

And irrelevant.

Are you going to elaborate on your facepalm, or just make witticisms and deflections and assume you are right?

I can elaborate on my facepalm though I do not assume that I am necessarily correct, which is the attitude I detected in your original post that earned you the facepalm in the first place. It was a terrible blanket-statement. A gross over generalization. But would you mind first elaborating then by your meaning of "conditioned need" for a higher power?

[ArchonAlarion]

I can't see INTPs diving too deep into religion. Questioning everything most likely leads you to atheism/agnosticism.

Questioning everything?

Why is that ILI again?

Seems more like something any reasonably intelligent person does. Also intense self examination of right/wrong is more 6 related than anything.

ILI's seem theistic to me. The Ni+Fi makes them all morally-like and "higher purpose". So they may be atheist in name, but it still seems like they aren't. (IME!!!!)

Alpha NT's tend to take a more extreme stance on either side (theistic or atheistic)

[Kritik]

But would you mind first elaborating then by your meaning of "conditioned need" for a higher power?

I am going a bit off topic but most people are born into their religion. Just take a look around the world.

[xerx]

Alpha NT's tend to take a more extreme stance on either side (theistic or atheistic)

That is absolutely, ridiculously 100% NOT true.

[ArchonAlarion]

That is absolutely, ridiculously 100% NOT true.

Umm why?

You do know what I mean by extreme, right? I don't mean flying jets into skyscrapers extreme. I mean taking things to their logical conclusions resulting in non-moderate beliefs. The thought of not taking an idea all the way (that I believe is correct) repulses me.

[Gilly]

I can elaborate on my facepalm though I do not assume that I am necessarily correct, which is the attitude I detected in your original post that earned you the facepalm in the first place.

I assume I'm right until I see reason to think I'm wrong. I don't just say this shit, you know.

But would you mind first elaborating then by your meaning of "conditioned need" for a higher power?

1. People who have been raised with religion or some form of belief that requires belief in a higher power, and have been indoctrinated successfully to the point that their psyche does not properly make sense of the world and their experiences without attributing some things to "God."

2. People who have experiences that they are incapable of explaining rationally within their scope of knowledge/understanding of the world, and thus the popular, and psychologically significant, rationale of "a power beyond my sight/knowledge/understanding" fills in the blanks.

3. People who have sufficiently connected their own sense of personal well-being with the concept of "having a God" such that they are emotionally dependent upon the idea.

[Logos]

I am going a bit off topic but most people are born into their religion. Just take a look around the world.

Yes, I gathered that much. There are also people "conditioned" in their lack of belief.

I assume I'm right until I see reason to think I'm wrong. I don't just say this shit, you know.

Ah ha! So you admit that it IS shit?!

1. People who have been raised with religion or some form of belief that requires belief in a higher power, and have been indoctrinated successfully to the point that their psyche does not properly make sense of the world and their experiences without attributing some things to "God."

2. People who have experiences that they are incapable of explaining rationally within their scope of knowledge/understanding of the world, and thus the popular, and psychologically significant, rationale of "a power beyond my sight/knowledge/understanding" fills in the blanks.

3. People who have sufficiently connected their own sense of personal well-being with the concept of "having a God" such that they are emotionally dependent upon the idea.

How are the last two conditioned?

[xerx]

Umm why?

You do know what I mean by extreme, right? I don't mean flying jets into skyscrapers extreme. I mean taking things to their logical conclusions resulting in non-moderate beliefs. The thought of not taking an idea all the way (that I believe is correct) repulses me.

uh, yeah, I know what you meant by "extreme" conclusions. Alpha NTs are decisively aware of which things can or can't be taken to their logical conclusion, because of strong Ti. Vague, nouminous, metaphysical questions about the unknown require a great deal of careful thought and analysis, and are difficult (if not impossible) to take to any logical conclusion.

But subtypes might also play a large part in conditioning this.

There is also a major difference between ILEs and LIIs. If ILEs ever take a stance on something, it disappears as soon as more information becomes relevant.

The individual easily generates logical systems and formulations to explain a set of phenomena that he has experienced or studied. However, these logical systems or explanations are not viewed as permanent or all-encompassing, but can be improved upon or even discarded as new experience and information is added.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

There have been subjective experiences that I went through that seemed really like whoa, amazingly internally and made me think there HAS to be a Creator, so I don't know. I'm a believer, and I don't think it takes away from my rationality or intelligence or practicality for anything like that. It's just I've personally had too many .....internal insights or something.

I used to be atheistic/agnostic but I find them to be emotionally stunted in a way, personally. They seem overly-institutionalized, or 'academized' in a way that I find to be kind of childish and fearful, no offense. *sigh* I agree with them on many points, and how science is good for us and all of that but emotions and magic are still stronger as far as humans are concerned. Sorry. =(

But I believe the path people on are what they need to be on, however I never had a shaman force me to be a shaman. I've had Christians force me to be Christian. (And I've had not as many, but a few atheists try and make me an atheist) That's what people find so annoying. You are insecure to me in your faith/lack of faith if you feel that in order for me to understand it you have to beat me over the head with it and stuff lol.

[Gilly]

How are the last two conditioned?

The second is related to the first in the sense of intellectual conditioning; people come to depend on the concept of God to explain their world, their emotions, and the way their lives play out.

The third one is practically the definition of positive reinforcement; how could you dispute that as conditioned?

[Logos]

The second is related to the first in the sense of intellectual conditioning; people come to depend on the concept of God to explain their world, their emotions, and the way their lives play out.

I understand that it is related to the first, and therefore not mutually exclusive, but #2 independently does not necessarily make them "conditioned" to believe.

The third one is practically the definition of positive reinforcement;

I'm not so sure about that.

how could you dispute that as conditioned?

Who is the agent the conditioning?

Is it possible to fall out of the realm of being conditioned for belief or lack thereof? If yes, then how is your original statement true in all cases. If not, then how was your original statement meaningful in any way?

[717495]

Maybe not people in your crowd or people you hang out with, but I know Christians from every type, even ILI, and I'm also a Christian. Just as much as I know some types that don't care about it, even ESE.

[sema sahin]

maybe, that's why I said "most likely", even if there is a pattern there won't be one that covers 100% of people of the same type, but from my experience I haven't met a single deeply religious INTP. A few were on the fence, but none had a blind faith. Still I realize I am guilty of stereotyping because this is based on no more than 10 INTPs.

Well...maybe it's easier for an INTp to follow a religion when the scriptures don't contradict science and actually seems to prove it...? I remember Hilly was telling me about how he read in the Qur'an about pregnancy and the three stages...he was amazed to find such things in a book revealed in a time when absolutely no one could have known such things. That's just one of the many things that convinced him though, there are certainly many more.