Forlornness: Necessarily?

Would an individual unassociated with conceptions of God or inherent meaning of life experience forlornness with the realization of His absence or Life's lack of inherent meaning?

 

What, you mean if this person was walking around not knowing about gods or meaning to life and someone one day told him about them? Well, he might start thinking "damn, i never knew there was meaning to life...what could it be, and why was I left out" and feeling down about it; but more likely he'll rationalize it and believe whatever he wants to fill the newly found hole. Freudian defense mechanism, in a way. Because after all, his life was going fine before he knew, so he must have been doing something right...right?

 

Without any knowledge of these misleading ideals, there can be no thinking about them.

 

Once introduced to a conceptual dillemma, a rational thinker will use all the evidence (whether experienced physically or concluded mentally) they can gather to weigh each side. The side that has the most amount of total evidence is what a rational thinker will believe. Now, since some people just aren't rational thinkers, that isn't always guaranteed, and some people also may have evidence that others don't. Regardless, the person would stop to think about it, come to various mental conclusions based on his experiences, and then decide whether to choose a side, or decide that they don't have enough evidence yet and suspend their judgment about the issue (not choosing any side in particular) because they are unsure.

As the comparisons go,
Theists said yes to the question, "Does God exist?"
Atheists said no to the question, "Does God exist?"
And agnostics suspended judgement and have decided that there is not enough evidence to decide either way.

 

But atheism and theism have to do with whether one BELIEVES in god(s), not whether they truly exist. In that case, one cannot suspend their judgement, you either believe, or you don't. Whether god REALLY exists or not is not taken into accound in these definitions (mainly because no one knows in the first place)

By the way, no one is a perfect rational thinker unless they've suffered a head trauma or brain damage (since birth or later). People have emotions, and emotions are integral to decision making

 

Okay, let me rephrase myself.

Theists said yes to the question, "Do you believe God exists?"
Atheists said no to the question, "Do you believe God exists?"
And when asked if they beleive God exists, agnostics said, "I've seen evidence that God exists, and I've seen evidence that God doesn't exist, and I'm not convinced of either of the two as of this moment, because both sides have presented an equivalent amount of evidence.

And yes, you CAN suspend judgment. This is one of the integral parts of rational thinking; we were taught this principal in my college Critical Thinking class. Every statement has a truth value; either true, or false. Since the vast majority of this time, the truth value is hidden from us, it is rational for us to believe that it is either true (where we must have more evidence for it than against it), or false (where we must have more evidence against it than for it), or we may choose to say that because this truth value is hidden from us, and because our total collected evidence does not sway to either side, we may also choose to suspend judgment and say, "I don't know."

I just phrased my statements incorrectly; forgive my grammatical laziness. =P