Hannahfluke
Member
No, it's one of personal preference, not of semantics. As objective truth cannot be a relevant factor in it, subjective plausibility is the deciding factor in whether or not an axiom is to be accepted by someone or not.
If I were to believe in the "none of it is" side of that, I guess I'd just save myself the waste of any further time and kill myself right now, whereas the "all of it is" lets me live a reasonably happy and fulfilled life. So, from this one individual's point of view here, it's hardly just semantics - it's an existentially important difference.
I firmly reject the statement made by some atheists that pantheism were "practically a form of atheism", the same way that they keep rejecting the statement that atheism were "practically a form of Abrahamitic monotheism".
I find it interesting that you think that without a belief in the divine, there's no reason to live and you might as well kill yourself. That may be your truth, and it's fine if it is, but I've found that for myself, I have been far less suicidal and far less likely to actually kill myself, now that I don't believe in the divine. When I believed in the divine, I felt that there was no way I could ever measure up to the insanely unrealistic expectations that were placed on me by the religious system I believed in. I also felt that I must obviously be unworthy of divine love, because if I were worthy, why would my life have been full of all the crap that happened in it (very simplified version of what I felt at the time)?
Now, granted, when I believed in a divine, it was something different than it sounds like you believe in it, but I still find it interesting that you feel life wouldn't be worth living without that particular belief. And I also find it interesting that a huge majority of the people who answered the poll do not believe in the divine.