Just something funny I thought I’d share:
I got nihilist. You?
Nihilism works for me.
And, I suspect, given the way the world works, it does for God too.
What if you are a “Fictionalist”?
It’s not on there…
Yeah, but that’s the beauty of it. ; o )
Why do some of the paths end with a question? Shouldn’t they all end in a label? Something like ‘Wishy-washy’, ‘Indecisive’, ‘Inconsistent’ or ‘Irrational’ may be applicable.
I got apatheist. I actually invented the word a couple of years ago to describe myself, and feeling all smug I logged on to share my new theology… only to find there was already a wiki page and several apatheist organisations registered. Nothing new under the sun. I tend to describe myself as an apathetic agnostic.
I think the chart is more of the mind map of the guy who made it.
It revolves around “god” and then “meaning”.
It may mean he needed some sort of meaning so badly and he used god to imagine the meaning.
Maybe we should make our own chart and it might be interesting.
Mine would be revolving around “awareness” and “certainty”, most probably.
I was dismayed to find that Christian Theist and existentialist are apparently mutually exclusive.
Well, isn’t meaning or the lack of it what it is all about? When people talk of the “big questions” (which don’t make sense for the most part) aren’t they searching for meaning ? Regardless of the validity of that pursuit?
I think that would be a fantastic idea as long as it was a conjunct effort between some members and not just you because I think your map would be just plain weird. 
I believe in a natural law and a social law, I think people who continually violate them should be reeducated.
The natural law-- do not take much more than what you need.
The social law-- if you are living in a society, do not take much more than what you give.
Aren’t the New Testament and the absurdity of existence in an uncaring universe a little at odds? 
Kierkegaard didn’t think so! But anyway, I’m an existentialist when it comes to my understanding of human nature, but I’m a Christian Theist.
I think for Kierkegaard, we arrive at the new testament (faith in a caring universe) after futily attempting to find satisfaction here. In some ways, the book of Ecclesiastes is an existentialist work. Whoever wrote it(I believe it was Sol Amen)acknowledges the apparent absurdity of the universe, that life is fraught with suffering/absurdity, the ceaseless cycles betwixt life/death and war/peace, but asks the reader to transcend it all by believing in a higher purpose, even though no such purpose is evident. That is how I think Christianity can be partially reconciled with Existentialism.
Nevertheless, I think the circle must be maintained, the Luciferians are trying to undo the natural order by unduly meddling with nature. If we are to avert disaster, they must be stopped. Here are the laws-- do not consume/produce more than you have to, do not take more from your society than you give. man is currently out of alignment with the natural/deterministic order of things, because of our higher faculties (reason, emotion, freedom of will), our Luciferic gifts, but we can choose to realign ourselves with the ebb and flow, by minimizing/puting a halt to the project of civilization, by deconstructing the tower of Babel, I warn you, because of our hubris, our debauchery, we have put the planet in imminent peril. Our space brothers are returning!
Throw away your car, your ipod, your laptop, repent oh ye sinners, the time for the great culling/purging is at hand, repent and you may be spared.
Ye who hath abused what the Elohim have temporarily bestowed us.
Yo. I think you would be better off in the religion section of this forum.
A worldview can either be philosophical or religious. Anyway, what I said isn’t religious, I’m not a Jew or a Christian, I’m a philosopher, though sometimes I use Greek, Roman, Jewish and Christian mythology in my thinking. There are natural and social laws (not necessarily divine laws, though I’m open to the possibility), and we’re all guilty of transgressing them, and there are natural and social penalties for violating them.
I often think because I feel something strange (perspective wise, so to say), such as the sense of contradiction, in my own thought pattern and/or that of others.
It’s more like troubleshooting badly written software than trying to come up with a theory to feel good/right/justified about own existence.
So, I don’t look for meaning/value/etc, in this case.
I think “meaning” is for people with some sort of insecurity.
Some of us probably need to sugar coat raw data (such as we don’t know much or things are often pretty uncertain) so that they can live with it.
Oh, you misunderstood what I said, again. I was talking about the chart made by each of us, not the ILP version (which can be interesting, though).
Each chart may closely reflect the thought pattern of the person.
Everyone searches for meaning. Insecure or not. We’re hardwired to do so. Which I guess is why it’s such a shock when we find that there’s no meaning but the one you project on things.
I think it depends on the culture, family, etc.
Also, it’s probably important to note that it’s not just any “meaning” but usually absolute meaning that we tend to look for, although we may not be aware of implied absoluteness of the meaning/value we desire.
And I think it’s a manifestation of desire for the absolute certainty (of logical mind).
In my case, I wasn’t looking for value or anything, but I understood the lack of logical absolute, one day, and I didn’t bother about meaning/value (with implied absolute), after that.
So, once we understand (and really understand to the bone) the fake nature of (absolute) meaning/value tossed by religions and moralists, etc, we don’t have to search it, any more.
Also, the insecurity caused by the lack of absolute certainty can be gone if one understand the nature of absolute (implied/imagined by us). It’s not necessarily easy, though.