Guild Wars 2

I see a lot of people comment on the “atheist” nature of the Charr and I’d like to know if that term is appropriate for their beliefs.

In the past, worshiping gods didn’t work out so well for the Charr, so they’ve decided to take charge and take their fate into their own hands (or paws). If you want something done right, do it yourself.

I’m not sure if this is atheism though. Atheism is the denial that gods or higher powers exist. But they Charr must know that something along the lines of gods exist, I mean, they’re inherent to the Guild Wars universe, aren’t they?

Now I’m not too up to speed on the GW1 lore, and I’m hoping someone will come along and clear up anything that I may be messing up here, but that doesn’t seem atheist to me. However, I’m not so sure the Charr believe in true “gods” anymore. So I suppose that if they now view all deities as extremely powerful beings, but not in fact gods, then atheism may apply…possibly. It seems a bit ambiguous though.

Anyway, I’m not arguing either side here, I just wanted to know what people think (or what people know that I don’t). Thanks.

They don’t even view the human gods as actually being gods.

DrakeWurrum.6049:

They don’t even view the human gods as actually being gods.

What do they view them as then? Surely they must respect their power, though they do not worship it. Take Kormir for example: any mortal who rises to such power is deserving of respect. The Charr know they can’t rely on these powerful people, whatever you call them, but that doesn’t mean they hate them, right? I’m wondering if you know the Charr’s feelings toward the so-called gods of the humans.

They do not believe in gods, nor do they worship any.

Yes. Atheist is correct.

Tea Eye Ay.6248:

DrakeWurrum.6049:

They don’t even view the human gods as actually being gods.

What do they view them as then? Surely they must respect their power, though they do not worship it. Take Kormir for example: any mortal who rises to such power is deserving of respect. The Charr know they can’t rely on these powerful people, whatever you call them, but that doesn’t mean they hate them, right? I’m wondering if you know the Charr’s feelings toward the so-called gods of the humans.

The wiki says it well enough.

Religion

Due to their history many charr shun religion. They do not accept any god’s authority and quickly anger on topics of charr worship or manipulation by god-like beings. Charr acknowledge other races’ gods as beings of power but do not see them as something worthy of worship. In the case of the Human Gods, the charr view the deities as beings to fight and strive to kill.

Keldrath.4735:

Tea Eye Ay.6248:

DrakeWurrum.6049:

They don’t even view the human gods as actually being gods.

What do they view them as then? Surely they must respect their power, though they do not worship it. Take Kormir for example: any mortal who rises to such power is deserving of respect. The Charr know they can’t rely on these powerful people, whatever you call them, but that doesn’t mean they hate them, right? I’m wondering if you know the Charr’s feelings toward the so-called gods of the humans.

The wiki says it well enough.

Religion

Due to their history many charr shun religion. They do not accept any god’s authority and quickly anger on topics of charr worship or manipulation by god-like beings. Charr acknowledge other races’ gods as beings of power but do not see them as something worthy of worship. In the case of the Human Gods, the charr view the deities as beings to fight and strive to kill.

It’s almost like they see them as tyrants controlling the people and want to overthrow them. Thank you.

The charr see the human gods as enemies to be destroyed. They cost the Charr Ascalon originally. They’re too busy worrying about dragons to do anything about it though.

Being atheistic means you don’t believe in gods.

The Charr believe in gods. They know gods exist. Because they crushed them.

So they’re more antitheist than atheist.

Basically, they don’t see gods as being ‘gods,’ they decry that as a fallacy. Instead, they see gods as powerful persons or beings which use their power to try and convince a peoples of their godhood, so that they might control them, and claim worship and offerings. This is what happened to the charr. The charr realised that the very notion of gods was inherently fake.

From the Wikipedia article on Atheism: “Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.”

The charr reject the idea that gods, as others believe in them, can exist. They think that the very notion of an all powerful being to be worshipped is fallacious, they see trickery, and they seem just a powerful person or creature trying to control others. That is the same as atheism.

The Egyptian peoples believed that some of their Pharaohs were gods, they believed this completely. However, an atheist would tell you that the concept of a god is a fallacious thing, and that a Pharaoh was just a powerful person pretending to be a god in order to achieve power. If a person believes in a god, and another doesn’t, it doesn’t make the person who doesn’t believe in a god not an atheist.

The charr believe that the notion of a ‘god’ is a fallacious thing. That a ‘god’ is not a real thing, but a construction created by a powerful person who wishes to control a peoples.

Now let me again cite the definition of atheism: “Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.”

By the very definition of atheism, by denying that a ‘god’ can actually exist, the charr are atheists. Don’t mix up the Flame Legion (who are god-worshipping theists) with the rest of the charr (who’re almost Universally atheist).

TL;DR: So for the last time. No. From someone who’s read every last thing about the charr, who’s played through the three legions multiple times, who’s spent more time with them than is healthy, I can say – no. The charr unequivocally do not believe in gods. There is no doubt about this. They see the word ‘god’ as an irony, an oxymoron. Hence ‘false gods.’ If the charr believed in gods, they’d say they did. But once again, they see powerful creatures trying to trick lesser minds into being controlled, they don’t see gods. They don’t believe in gods. Therefore they are atheist.

Really though, why is this so hard to understand?

The charr say: “Faith is weakness, as gods are false. If any powerful creature ever posed as a god and tried to control us, we’d destroy it for the insult.”

The charr do not say: “We believe in gods, we understand that there are powerful creatures who’re worthy of worship. We accept their existence.”

The former is atheism, the latter is not. The former is what the charr say, the latter is not. How… do people have issues understanding this? It boggles the mind.

Then I suppose their attitude is – anything we can destroy is not a god.

AuldWolf, it’s “hard to understand” because you’re describing two wildly different ‘types’ of Atheism.

Imagine a person in the real world who acknowledges the Christian God exists, lives and rules the Kingdom of Heaven in some invisible city in the sky, has incredible otherworldly powers including the ability to create life, but says you shouldn’t worship him. Would you actually call that person an Atheist? Probably not!

That’s how the Charr view gods. They acknowledge everything about them up until the actual worship part – that they reject.

At a certain point we end up at the “walks and talks like a duck” argument. How do you define a God? For many it’s the power they have, how they “lord” over a people or perhaps create life. Gods are clearly different than the rest of living beings. These are all things the Charr acknowledge; they just don’t think a God should be worshipped or have authority despite these qualities.

To use your own analogy, Charr do not say “Grenth doesn’t exist”. They say “Grenth exists, and we should probably kill him”

SirPenguin.5931:

Gods are clearly different than the rest of living beings.

Different in what way? There are many creatures in the Tyria which hold substantial supernatural power. In what way are the human “gods” special? Why should we regard Grenth as a god when Zhaitan, Baelfire, or even the Mighty Oouo are not?

The Charr see the gods of the other races as powerful entities to be conquered. Nothing more, nothing less. The Charr no longer rely on the powers of others to fight, and to do so in Charr society is weak, the Flame Legion for example relies on outward powers, Titans, Destroyers, etc. This is not the Charr way. Charr are strong because they made themselves strong.

It is not that Charr don’t believe that these Gods exist, just that the Charr don’t need a God to worship.

“Charr needs no gods” At some point the Charr might encounter a a true god, but they might not accept it as such because they will likely die trying to kill it. Perhaps after a majority of the Charr population is wiped out the survivors might change their tune?

The term you’re perhaps looking for is misotheism, that is “God hating”. They believe the Gods exist, but deem them unworthy of worship and see them as forces to be opposed and harmed if possible. Misotheists see themselves as potentially harming Gods by not worshipping them.

Broken tools! It pains me.

Devildoc.6721:

The term you’re perhaps looking for is misotheism, that is “God hating”. They believe the Gods exist, but deem them unworthy of worship and see them as forces to be opposed and harmed if possible. Misotheists see themselves as potentially harming Gods by not worshipping them.

This is pretty close to the truth, I think, as any thing else possibly could.

It’s still not quite accurate, though. It’s not that they don’t believe the Six exist, or the Norn spirits, or any other specific religious beings – they just don’t view them as gods. They’re nothing more than beings of great power, who can be killed like anybody else. They see no reason to worship such beings.

You can’t exactly be “god hating” if you don’t even believe the being you hate is a god, can you?

AuldWolf.7598:

Really though, why is this so hard to understand?

The charr say: “Faith is weakness, as gods are false. If any powerful creature ever posed as a god and tried to control us, we’d destroy it for the insult.”

The charr do not say: “We believe in gods, we understand that there are powerful creatures who’re worthy of worship. We accept their existence.”

The former is atheism, the latter is not. The former is what the charr say, the latter is not. How… do people have issues understanding this? It boggles the mind.

Because they also don’t say that the Six that the humans worship don’t exist. They merely say that they’re not gods, and don’t seem them as worthy of worship.

AuldWolf.7598:

The charr reject the idea that gods, as others believe in them, can exist. They think that the very notion of an all powerful being to be worshipped is fallacious, they see trickery, and they seem just a powerful person or creature trying to control others. That is the same as atheism.

I don’t feel it’s the same. Those of us who happen to be atheist don’t believe in the gods that these others worship at all. If I were to admit that the Olympic pantheon actually existed, but simply say “Naw, they weren’t gods. They were just a long-lived and powerful species that died out years ago,” or even “Naw, they weren’t gods, they were just aliens, and we couldn’t tell the difference,” or even (like the charr) “They were just humans who fooled an entire people into believing they were gods,” I’m not saying that I don’t believe they existed. I’m simply denying their status as gods.

There really isn’t a word that describes that, as far as I’m concerned. In a semantic sense, atheism is “inclusive” of this concept, but there’s a difference between denying a being’s existence, and denying a being’s deity status.

As far as I can tell, if the charr were to encounter a legitimate deity, they would recognize its existence, though they’re unlikely to worship it. They have a very scientific approach to life, in that way.

DrakeWurrum.6049:

I don’t feel it’s the same. Those of us who happen to be atheist don’t believe in the gods that these others worship at all. If I were to admit that the Olympic pantheon actually existed, but simply say “Naw, they weren’t gods. They were just a long-lived and powerful species that died out years ago,” or even “Naw, they weren’t gods, they were just aliens, and we couldn’t tell the difference,” or even (like the charr) “They were just humans who fooled an entire people into believing they were gods,” I’m not saying that I don’t believe they existed. I’m simply denying their status as gods.

There really isn’t a word that describes that, as far as I’m concerned. In a semantic sense, atheism is “inclusive” of this concept, but there’s a difference between denying a being’s existence, and denying a being’s deity status.

There are actual real-world examples though! Just consider a list of people who have been considered deities. We acknowledge that the Egyptian pharaohs actually lived, for example, but simply do not recognize them as gods — and that is perfectly consistent with an atheistic viewpoint.

In Tyria, one might argue that the “gods” actually have supernatural power, unlike the Egyptian pharaohs — but the problem here is that many creatures in Tyria hold supernatural power, so that’s no longer a meaningful criterion.

I wish I could be part of the flame legion. I always like to play the religious zealots, but the only thing close to that in GW2 are the humans and they’re not zealous enough for my liking. The Flame Legion on the other hand, FUN! Aw well, will just have to manage in the godless Blood Legion. =(

Actually… the Gods of the humans are considered gods by the people of Tyria. Their definition must not overlap with ours, but in the end, they are very powerful beings with some credence over a specific aspect of life.

For humans, they created Tyria as it is, which in their eyes justifies worship. And seeing that the gods helped them conquer Ascalon and kicking the Charr out…
Even the Charr have legends of a being – that is specifically Melandru – creating the world. (GW2Wiki)
Lets just say, defining “what is a god” is pretty useless in this argument from the questions point of view.

Because irregardless of what a god actually is, the Charr do not give akitten Even if a Charr would ascend to godhood like Kormir did, the rest of the race would see him/her not as somebody you should suddenly start to worship. Worship – and therefore submitting – to a powerful being is idiotic to them, because they once were in the shackles of false gods – the Titans. They – as a race – want to forge their own destiny, most of their culture is based around that and they find unity in that thought.

So in conclusion, they are neither true misotheists, nor atheists.
The Charr racial belief would be Antitheism, but i prefer the simpler and more exact term Nay-theist.
“The Nay Theist is not an atheist or agnostic — he is well aware of the existence of the Gods (or God), and freely admits it; he just refuses to worship them, or to “believe” in them in any strong Spiritual sense beyond merely acknowledging the fact of their existence.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NayTheist

theism and atheism are opposites. you are either one or the other. either you believe, or you do not believe. they do not believe.

antitheism is different it’s about being against religion. they fit into both categories. not only do they not believe in gods, they are opposed to the idea and what it represents as well, and actively fight against it.

Drakewurrum explained all of it very clearly. Like he said, they know the human “gods” exist. But knowing they exist and acknowledging that they actually are gods is a separate issue. they do not believe them to actually be gods. Unless you can point out a god that they believe in, then they remain atheists, and also antitheists. not one or the other.

This is something that bugs me from a role-playing perspective. Due to not having a silent protagonist, our characters are formulated. I wanted to play an atypical Charr who had an interest in human religion and a sympathy for the Flame Legion’s original goals. Unfortunately, no matter what direction I take the storyline, I’ll have to ignore it because it doesn’t give me much freedom in my character’s personality.

I was hoping that having a Flame Legion Shaman for a father would have influenced my character’s outlook, but it doesn’t. Even the voice lines in the Charr racial skill ‘Battle Cry’ are out of character for my Charr, who wouldn’t say ’Charr need no Gods!" and honestly mean it unless he was in the company of other Charr and wished to hide his true beliefs.

It’s a small niggle, but one that’s been bugging me. For a roleplayer it’s just a tiny bit annoying to be pidgeonholed. I’d have liked there to be a bit more control over your character’s development and mannerisms.

I’d also have loved to join the Flame Legion given the option.

“I don’t believe in gods. I don’t believe in mosquitoes either, I just know they exist and deal with the fact. The same principle applies.”

No, Charr are just taking a break from faith. They’re a bit scarred after the humans literally killed their gods. They’ll be back— Hell, even the ingenious Asura have a faith in something.

Yeah, Charr anti-theism mainly stems from them being an extremily proud race. Their attempt at harnassing the power of worship ended badly for them. They needed a scapegoat for their failure, which ended up being the Flame Legion and their titan gods. Then they just got organized and killed everyone.

Woah, Frosty, I think you don’t want to go there!

a) It devalues real-life human atheists by implying that we, too, are just ‘taking a break from faith’
b) It rejects the trust and belief that charr have in themselves and in the Legions. Charr are secular humanist-equivalents; they believe in the potential of charr.
c) It blithely counts asuran belief in the Eternal Alchemy (pantheistic more than anything else) as a religion, which is a dubious contention at best.

The Eternal Alchemy is an ideology not a religion.

I had no idea atheism accepted the belief in magic, ghosts, spirits, and other supernatural phenomena.

geldedgoat.5928:

I had no idea atheism accepted the belief in magic, ghosts, spirits, and other supernatural phenomena.

first “Magic” is real in this game world, and second the rest of your comment has nothing to do with atheism.

AuldWolf.7598 explanation, is a great answer.

geldedgoat.5928:

I had no idea atheism accepted the belief in magic, ghosts, spirits, and other supernatural phenomena.

It most certainly can actually. The only thing atheism deals with is the god question. You can believe in all sorts of crazy supernatural stuff, but if no gods are included among them, you are by definition an atheist. That’s one of the reason why many buddhists are atheist, despite their supernatural beliefs.

That’s one of the biggest problems with the label itself, it tells you absolutely nothing about what a person believes in, it only tells you about 1 thing they do not believe in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitheism

Definitely fits much better than athiesm.

The charr are atheist because they believe that the beings the humans worship are not gods. They acknowledge them as beings of power but deny that they are gods. “Rely on iron, not false gods.” To a charr all “gods” are false gods.

It’s the same as real life. “This natural disaster is an act of God.” An atheist doesn’t deny that the disaster occurred but would certainly deny that it is the work of any divine entity. You don’t have to deny that pharaohs existed to deny that they were gods. They were false gods.

The terms don’t really translate, at least in the sense that atheism is the denial of the existence of divine being(s). Denying the existence of most “gods” in Tyria is akin to believing the earth is flat today. There’s overwhelming proof that such beings exist, it’s merely a matter of if you believe they should be worshiped or not.

@Riot: Not really. The human “gods” are analogous to the titans or mursaat. They clearly exist and they are clearly powerful, but the existence of a powerful being that tells you to bow before it doesn’t make it a god.

As in the Pharaoh example, there have been powerful people in real life who have claimed to be gods. But it doesn’t make them a god. The problem really is defining “what is a god” in the first place in this context, even then at the end of the day we’re arguing over definitions; no matter how you cut it the charr deny the existence of any supreme authority but themselves and that is final.

Stormdancer.4972:

Being atheistic means you don’t believe in gods.

The Charr believe in gods. They know gods exist. Because they crushed them.

Not true. The beings the Charr worshipped as “Gods” were the Titans/Destroyers much in the same way that the White Mantle worshipped the Mursaat, which were also not “Gods”.

What the Charr crushed were, in essence, False Gods and that’s how the Charr view them.

Atheism as simply a lack of belief in things named gods is a LONG outdated mode of thinking, an evolution made necessary by the discovery of Eastern and New World faiths and religions that don’t fit neatly into the theist/atheist spectrum. The more proper definition now reflects a lack of belief in all supernatural beings and phenomena, as what may simply be an angel, demon, or even magic in one religion is a god in another.

The other posters have it right: the Charr are some form of antitheist, as atheism simply doesn’t make sense in this game world.

Oh, and no Buddhist is atheistic. The closest one would come is nontheistic.

Get your terms straight, people.

Atheism = Denial of existance of gods
Agnosticism = Not believing in gods, but gods might exist

Even though the charr have so far denied that most of the gods (if not all) in the gw2 world are gods, they probably still do not deny the existance of a god ultimatively.

The iron legion catchphrase “Rely on iron, not on false gods” is actually a great example, since it only says to not rely on false gods. In return this actually leaves the possibility that the charr think that actual gods might exist, in turn making them agnostics.

geldedgoat.5928:

I had no idea atheism accepted the belief in magic, ghosts, spirits, and other supernatural phenomena.

Magic, ghosts, spirits and other phenomena in the game world are not “supernatural” – they’re “natural”. Nature includes sapient plant people.

Supernatural: of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.

Within the setting, those things are natural, and the theories and concepts are utilized by many members of the population – mesmers, elementalists, necromancers, etc.

^Where is that explained? Just because magic “exists” and many beings make use of it, doesn’t mean it’s no longer magic. In fact, the use of the term magic heavily implies that it’s not natural; that’s kinda what magic typically means. The same goes for ghosts, spirits, and all the rest. Natural means it must adhere to the laws of nature and physics. I haven’t made it all the way through the game, so maybe somewhere a rational explanation is given.

Atheism = Denial of existance of gods
Agnosticism = Not believing in gods, but gods might exist

You’ve got the pop-culture definitions correct, but not the academic ones.
theism/atheism = refers to belief in the supernatural
gnosticism/agnosticism = refers to claims of knowledge
gnostic theism = belief in the supernatural with a claim of personal knowledge that the belief is true, “I know the supernatural is real.”
agnostic theism = belief in the supernatural with no claims of personal knowledge, “I think the supernatural is real, but I can’t be sure.” Also could be informed by an admitted assumption of what seems personally obvious.
gnostic atheism = belief that the supernatural doesn’t/can’t exist with a claim of personal knowledge that the belief is true, “I know the supernatural isn’t real.”
agnostic atheism = belief that the supernatural doesn’t/can’t exist with no claims of personal knowledge, “I think the supernatural isn’t real, but I can’t be sure.” Also could be informed by an admitted assumption of what seems personally obvious.

I debated the topic with my friend and I have changed my mind about whether or not they are atheist.

I have come to the conclusion that we do not actually know enough about what they believe to conclude whether they are atheist or theist. We don’t know what their definition of a god is or whether they do or do not expressly believe they exist.

We know they acknowledge the existence of the human gods, whether they believe they actually are gods is subject to interpretation and you could really take it either way with no definitive answer.

Until I am presented with evidence as to whether or not they do believe in gods, I’m going to have to say we can’t make the judgment call. So far the only evidence I can come up with is that they believe most gods are false, they haven’t said all gods are false. and that the charr need no gods, etc. but none of the quotes or anything I could find actually say they don’t believe god’s exist. They could very well believe that there are gods, but they do not accept that they have authority over them. It is clear they are very anti-theistic.

So until we know what their concept of a god is and whether or not they believe any exist, we can’t really say either way.

geldedgoat.5928:

Atheism as simply a lack of belief in things named gods is a LONG outdated mode of thinking, an evolution made necessary by the discovery of Eastern and New World faiths and religions that don’t fit neatly into the theist/atheist spectrum. The more proper definition now reflects a lack of belief in all supernatural beings and phenomena, as what may simply be an angel, demon, or even magic in one religion is a god in another.

The other posters have it right: the Charr are some form of antitheist, as atheism simply doesn’t make sense in this game world.

Oh, and no Buddhist is atheistic. The closest one would come is nontheistic.

nontheistic is what atheist means.

It’s a greek word. Theist means belief in gods. A is a negation of the following. so atheist = no belief in gods.

RoterFuchs.9216:

Get your terms straight, people.

Atheism = Denial of existance of gods
Agnosticism = Not believing in gods, but gods might exist

Even though the charr have so far denied that most of the gods (if not all) in the gw2 world are gods, they probably still do not deny the existance of a god ultimatively.

The iron legion catchphrase “Rely on iron, not on false gods” is actually a great example, since it only says to not rely on false gods. In return this actually leaves the possibility that the charr think that actual gods might exist, in turn making them agnostics.

Your definitions are incorrect.

There is one claim.

God’s exist.

If you accept that claim as necessarily true, you are a theist. If you do not accept the claim is necessarily true, you are an atheist. it is a true dichotomy.

Your definition of what an agnostic is and belief that it is separate from atheism is a common misconception of the misinformed. Agnosticism is about whether you think we can know that gods exist or not. It is a knowledge claim not a belief claim.

Most atheists are in fact also agnostics. and most agnostics are actually by definition atheists, though they shun the label for whatever reason they may have, usually misconceptions.

Just to further confuse things..

Are humans atheists?

The Charr is a collective of individuals. Ultimately every side can probably find an example that supports their interpretation as “proof”, but no one example provides the “Platonic Form” of a Charr :p

Some (If not the majority) may be true atheists, some may be agnostics some oddballs may even hold other races religious beliefs, not to mention the flame legion…

Keldrath.4735:

nontheistic is what atheist means.

You’re incorrect. One gives a negative answer to the question of the existence of the supernatural (atheist); the other rejects or ignores the question altogether (nontheist). Think about the difference between amoral and immoral (though here the etymology is reversed). The best evidence of the Buddhist position is given by the parable of the poison arrow.

geldedgoat.5928:

Keldrath.4735:

nontheistic is what atheist means.

You’re incorrect. One gives a negative answer to the question of the existence of the supernatural (atheist); the other rejects or ignores the question altogether (nontheist). Think about the difference between amoral and immoral (though here the etymology is reversed). The best evidence of the Buddhist position is given by the parable of the poison arrow.

That would be true if your definition of an atheist was actually a correct one. All one needs to be an atheist is to have no belief in the existence of any gods. Many buddhist sects have no belief in the existence of any gods.

Atheism says nothing about the supernatural.

I do not know where you are getting your information from, but whatever your source is it is incredibly misinformed.

Instead of religion debate it’s probably better to give context to the Charr’s reasoning.
In the first game they were a shamanistic society worshiping the Titans, who were Demonic servants to Abaddon. Who had the Titans and Charr invade the Human nations.
At the end of Nightfall you kill Abaddon and Kormir becomes a god in his place. But as far as the Charr see it, some yahoos from the middle of nowhere just killed their god’s god and it probably started some kind of big change in perspective saying “if gods can be killed then they aren’t worth worship” and probably started killing off the remnants of the titans themselves.

Keldrath.4735:

Many buddhist sects have no belief in the existence of any gods.

Refusing to take a stance is distinctly different from responding negatively (or positively), so it’s just plain wrong to label them atheist. Really, read up on that parable I linked to.

Atheism says nothing about the supernatural.

Well, I already explained why that’s wrong, but believe what you want. ‘Atheism’ certainly isn’t the only term that’s been forced to evolve from its classical origins (which you do accurately describe).

geldedgoat.5928:

Keldrath.4735:

nontheistic is what atheist means.

You’re incorrect. One gives a negative answer to the question of the existence of the supernatural (atheist); the other rejects or ignores the question altogether (nontheist). Think about the difference between amoral and immoral (though here the etymology is reversed). The best evidence of the Buddhist position is given by the parable of the poison arrow.

You (both) are presenting but one of several definitions of the term.

geldedgoat.5928:

^Where is that explained? Just because magic “exists” and many beings make use of it, doesn’t mean it’s no longer magic. In fact, the use of the term magic heavily implies that it’s not natural; that’s kinda what magic typically means. The same goes for ghosts, spirits, and all the rest. Natural means it must adhere to the laws of nature and physics. I haven’t made it all the way through the game, so maybe somewhere a rational explanation is given.

By definition, magic is natural in the setting, not supernatural.
Natural (adjective):
1. existing in or formed by nature ( opposed to artificial): a natural bridge.
2. based on the state of things in nature; constituted by nature: Growth is a natural process.
3. of or pertaining to nature or the universe: natural beauty.
4. of, pertaining to, or occupied with the study of natural science: conducting natural experiments.
5. in a state of nature; uncultivated, as land.

Our “nature” is not their “nature”. Devourers and giant spiders are natural, even though their existence violates the square cubed law in our physics.