>the faith-based theist
takes the existence of god as axiomatic. although they have good intuition, they do a terrible job of justifying it

>the atheist
grows an inflated sense of intelligence by debunking the dimwitted arguments of the faith-based theist. as a result, they confidently make the mistake of throwing the baby out with the bath water, claiming that god does not exist. and despite being proponents of logic and science, they take a position that is inherently paradoxical. it's a claim that reality lacks a coherent metaphysical identity (god). a statement which is metaphysical by construction – i.e., which refers to nature or physical reality from above, occupying a higher level of reference - cannot be true where it explicitly denies its own metaphysical support. it implicitly affirms its own truth while denying its own truth

>the nontheist
is not arrogant like the atheist. they realize they do not currently have the knowledge to take a position, so they reserve the possibility for the existence of god

>the logical theist
uses logic and mathematics to reason from first principles to prove reality holds certain properties, which fits the traditional definition of god. such as, omniscience, omnipresence, etc.