Talk:Ietsism

message: Unsubstantiated contentious claim:"Ietsism often coincides with a belief in pseudoscience or paranormal phenomena"
There is no evidential backing up of this claim sourced, it appears to just be a supposition of an editor - and indeed statistically can be interpreted in three wholly distinct ways: 1. An unusually high portion of ietists believe in pseudoscience etc, 2. An unusually high proportion of pseudo/paranormal believers are ietists [which is not at all the same relationship as 1] or 3. Both relations hold.
The only way to ascertain if any of these is true is to get actual statistical evidence and do a chi squared test to assess significance. 
There may well be such evidence, but since it is not cited, at the moment the claim is merely a statement of personal prejudice.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.2.120.160 (talk) 12:18, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

message: This is a very useful article, very helpful, and while I see the notice that it has not been inadequately documented, I hope that it can be-- and especially that it can stay in the Wikepedia.  (I did not write it and I have no idea who did).  Thank you and again please retain it until someone who knows more about the topic can improve this piece.  Many thanks and of course thanks for the Wikepedia.
128.103.197.142 15:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The literal translation of the Dutch verb "moet" is "must" but the actual purport is more like "has to be", i.e. it does not refer to some kind of obligation but to (alleged) logical reasoning that only could have the outcome that there has to be something. 79.185.12.123 (talk) 10:40, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: True. Ietsism is not a religion, it's a state of mind along the lines of: "I suspect that there is something 'out there'.  I don't know what it is, but I don't think that religions know any more about it either" .  I would say that it is definitely a form of 'active' rather than 'passive' agnosticism.  In other words you 'arrive' at Ietsism as the result of a thought process, as opposed to 'falling' into it as a default position.  Maybe it's agnosticism for people with a "God gene" :-) ChrisRed (talk) 10:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Quoting: "Ietsism may roughly be described as a belief in an end-in-itself or similar concept, without further assumption to exactly what object or objects have such a property, like intrinsic aliquidism without further specification. Other aliquidistic lifestances include the acceptance of "there is something - that is, some meaning of life, someting that is an end-in-itself or something more to existence - and it is...", assuming various objects or "truths", ".  Does anybody actually know what this means?, and what on earth it has to do with Ietsism? ChrisRed (talk) 07:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: OLd

message: I don't see a difference between the two states of mind... and think that it would better for both if this article (Ietsism) became a sub-section of Agnostic theism.
Kilnhanger (talk) 16:02, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not so sure. I'd classify Ietsism as Agnostic deism. JocK (talk) 20:38, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that, James.  Yes, I agree that 'Agnostic Theism' and 'Ietsism' are close, but subtly different.  Agnostic Theism infers the mindset: "I believe that there is something; but I don't know what it is, and neither do you". Ietsism is more like: "No matter how illogical or unscientific it seems, my mind still 'feels' 'something' out there.  I don't know why; I don't know what it is, and neither do you".  Personally I find it hard to understand why, when I was 'implanted' with five 'beliefs' at the same impressionable early age: (Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy, Guardian Angels, God and the Bogey Man) only one of them still troubles me, whilst I can easily dismiss the other four as myths by logic.  If there is an objection to using a foreign-language term on Wikipedia, perhaps we should just call it "Somethingism" and be done with it :-) (ChrisRed 86.148.252.237 (talk) 22:18, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is a fundamental difference between deism and theism. And as the redirection of 'Agnostic deism' to this article entails that the two are the same, that alone would seem to me to be sufficient grounds to claim that ietsism is not the same as agnostic theism. I, however, believe that what is described in this article is vague enough to cover both positions, i.e. one could argue that the personal nature of this "something" is not specified. Therefore, what we should do is let ietsism be ietsism (an umbrella term for agnostic theism/deism), and remove the redirection from the 'Agnostic deism' page with a stub I propose in the section below titled 'Agnostic Deism vs. Ietsism'. Thank you all for your consideration! --Rcgy (talk) 06:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Should this article should be merged with [[Agnostic theism]]?

message: I'm wondering if our top line definition needs a small 'tweak'.  The meaning of 'somethingism' in Dutch seems subtly different to how I interpret it on our English page.  I refer for example to a recent BBC article 'How can a church have Atheist Clergy'. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14417362 and I've read similar in other Dutch-language material.
Here it seems that ietsism (in Holland) is not so much about the existence/non existence of god, but more a feeling that there is some remaining unknown aspect of 'being' or 'sentience' beyond the reach of the scientific method.  Perhaps more within the realm of Jung (the 'collective unconscious' etc).  I don't like to be arrogant and just change an established page without prior discussion, so what does the congregation think? :-) (ChrisRed) 81.156.38.7 (talk) 13:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: Hi all! I'm unsure as to whether it is a good idea to redirect searches for 'Agnostic deism' to 'Ietsism'. As I understand it, a perfectly acceptable stub for agnostic deism would be as follows: "Agnostic deism is a combination of agnosticism and deism. It is the view that the truth values of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—are unknown and, so far as can be judged, unknowable (agnosticism), but that this view is not mutually exclusive with the belief that reason and observation of the natural world—without the need for organized religion—can determine that the universe is the product of a creator (deism)." The first term deals with a person's ability to know, the second with a person's belief. I don't get that meaning from the definition of ietsism in this article, so I am not convinced that redirection is warranted. I would be interested in hearing the argument for redirection. Best regards! --Rcgy (talk) 06:04, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agnostic Deism vs. Ietsism 

message: "Some of the English language equivalent terms are agnostic theism and deism." 
Pretty sure that's untrue since agnostic theism still is theism and ietsism excludes theism. "those having ietsistic beliefs are counted as believers without religion" according to the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.163.135.178 (talk) 04:40, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agnostic Theism and Deism? 

message: "There is something, but I don't know what it is. But there must surely be something. Not nothing. Something. I don't know what that something is, but that there is something, of that I am sure. I think"
That "I think" seems like someone poking fun to me. Is that actually part of the quote? It makes people who believe this seem indecisive and silly. "I believe" there "must" be..."I think"? Even if some people actually feel this way, I don't think it should be used as an example for all of these "believers", as that contradicts the idea of "belief" to begin with. Perhaps you could split it into people who suspect a god, and those who believe a god, but to combine the two in one quote seems ridiculous, even insulting..45Colt 09:23, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. The entire quote was apparently fake. It didn't exist yet before this edit in 2011 on RationalWiki. It has no basis and therefore I have removed it. Bataaf van Oranje (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism? 

message: I am a widely-read native English speaker and had never come across this word until I stumbled into this article.  The article says "The word has recently (2012) begun to circulate among English speakers as a loanword" – but no authority for this remark is cited, and I suspect that the word is not recognised by many English speakers (if any).  I query its appropriateness in the English Wikipedia.  Deipnosophista (talk) 18:38, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not appropriate? 

message: Thanks for all these versions, from where I first learned about Ietsism.  And I like the greater length and detail of the current one, but also very much prefer the much simpler and less "fancy" initial explanation of the 1st (?) 2007 version.  The last sentence is probably a little obsolete or dated (going back to 2005) but all the rest of seems to me is much simpler and easier to understand.  It goes like this:
Ietsism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ietsism (Dutch “ietsisme” - "Somethingism") is a Dutch language term for a range of beliefs held by people who, on the one hand, inwardly suspect that there is “More between Heaven and Earth” than we know about, but on the other hand do not subscribe to the established belief system, dogma or view of the nature of God offered by any particular religion. The nearest English language equivalent term is Agnostic spiritualism.
The name derives from the Dutch equivalent of the question: "Do you believe in the conventional 'Christian' God?", a typical 'ietsist' answer being "No, but there must be something".
An opinion poll conducted by the Dutch daily newspaper “Trouw” in October 2004 indicated that some 40% of its readership felt broadly this way.
The term became known in the Netherlands after the atheist political columnist Ronald Plasterk (who has since become the Minister of Education, Culture and Science) used it in a feature for the television programme “Buitenhof” ("outer court"). But the term possibly existed already.
In contrast to traditional agnostics who often hold a sceptical view (i.e. “Do not believe what one cannot know”), “ietsists” take a less dismissive viewpoint along the lines of “There is maybe much more than we can know”. It is a form of religious liberalism or non-denominationalism. The interpretation of it can range between the Judeo/Christian/Islamic conception of a God as a force that exists outside the world, to a position similar to the Buddhist "world view" with collective spiritual power existing within the world.
In October 2005, the word “ietsisme” was included in the 14th edition of the Dutch Language Dictionary 'Dikke Van Dale', but has also recently begun to circulate among English-speakers as a loanword.
50.234.189.43 (talk) 14:34, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prefer the 1st (?) 2007 version