"Not that I condone fascism, or any -ism for that matter. -Ism's in my opinion are not good. A person should not believe in an -ism, he should believe in himself. I quote John Lennon, "I don't believe in Beatles, I just believe in me." Good point there. After all, he was the walrus. I could be the walrus. I'd still have to bum rides off people." Ferris Bueller
We teaists ( those who sit back and enjoy understanding, assessing and comparing the arguments for and against divine beings, with a warm cup of tea. (PS. Coffee sucks)) feel underrepresented in your chart..
I'm sure that could fall under atheism or agnosticism or nontheism where nontheism should be seen as a firmly undecided position which does not include or preclude any position regarding the belief in such divine being.
Minor critique, but I think calling it Atheistic Apatheism and Theistic Apatheism would be more consistent.
There's about a billion subclasses you could use in this. Like: kathenotheism is pantheism where one god is considered supreme. Or henotheism where you don't believe one god is supreme, but still have a patron deity above others that may exist. Omnism is when you believe all religions are essentially correct. And if agnosticism is that we can't know anything outside material phenomena, academicism is that we can't know anything at all, while solipsism is that we can only know that we (the self) exists. There are also people who differentiate agnostic a/theism from implicit a/theism. Saying that implicit atheists are only people who have not heard of gods or have not considered gods. Where agnostic atheism is not having a belief in gods but that gods are unknown or unknowable. There's also divisions in atheism based on materialism, if only the material universe exists or immaterial aspects of the universe exist.
What I think I need to do is to somehow intergrate "Unsure person that does not belong into a isms" and "Inconclusive varied nontheism" as they are somewhat the same thing in the whole grand scheme of thing.
I'll add henotheism, academicism, solipsism somewhere. I will also add dualistic atheism. So much different theological position.
What if I thought (not believed) based on personal experiences I had and thousands of individual independent eye witness claims that the so called "paranormal" has a universal and scientific/ logical (not logical to the current mindset of society) explanation without all the karma/magic/Gods are uber special spiritualism bullshit. For example I hold the theory that "Gods/spirits/ astral projection" etc is real but not in the sense of how they are currently defined by the many narrow minded belief systems in society. These are normal things/ people that don't need to be worshiped or prayed to. What would I be?
A schism is a division between people, usually belonging to an organization or movement religious denomination. The word is most frequently applied to a break of communion between two sections of Christianity that were previously a single body, or to a division within some other religion. It is also used of a split within a non-religious organization or movement or, more broadly, of a separation between two or more people, be it brothers, friends, lovers, etc.
Typo: I'm pretty sure you mean "panentheism" instead of "panetheism". But I wouldn't consider that a distinct stream of theistic thought. It's compatible with any number of religious systems, both polytheistic and monotheistic. Significant portions of Christianity are arguably panentheistic, as is Hinduism.
Deism might or might not be religious in nature. I think you could fairly call many Unitarians deist, for example. It's the difference between credal and non-credal religions, I think.
One of my friends, a while ago (he stopped believing in what he was saying), classified himself as a christian, and he did believe in God and everything, but he absolutely hated religion (both as a concept and as what it is) and wished no one believed in any.