Yo. I am, apparently to many of you, an "atheist". This label is unimportant to me, but seems to mislead. I do not wish to be known by what I am not (not theist), and I do not wish to allow the category of negation to be included among the categories of actualization. ("Not religious" is simply not congruent to other groupings under "Religious affiliation".) Let me be specific -- and ask you to use this specificity should you wish to discuss me.
I am not superstitious. I try to help those who are superstitious overcome their superstitions (this was, for me, part of growing up). What, exactly, defines "superstitious"? A belief in the supernatural. What defines "a belief in the supernatural"? Any -- and I mean any -- assignment of material change to non-material actors. "Supernatural" is, to me, an excuse for not fully understanding the natural.
I will jump to the chase. There is no God. There are no Gods. There never were any. (As an aside: all prophets lie. If you take nothing else from this diary, remember that: all prophets lie.) It is meaningful that those who argue otherwise talk about "belief". Belief is simply a category for accepting the supernatural without calling it supernatural.
Belief in the supernatural is ... insupportable. It may be important to you -- it may vital to your psyche -- but it remains insupportable.
You may think of me as an "atheist". That misses the point. Whatever I am -- I am embodied, and I perceive that which is external to me. I apply logic to those perceptions. Logic demands that I restrict my underderstanding to that which is material. And so I do.
(There is nothing under the croissant with two backs. I will respond to comments after giving them some thought, which is to say, tomorrow.)
Thanks for reading. And for thinking twice before using the term "atheist". (It's a bit like "non-White".)
Are you superstitious?