Telex
External Link
Internal Link
Inventory Cache
![]() |
Agnosticism
This nOde
last updated January 15th, 2008 and is permanently morphing...
(9 Et'znab (Flint) /
6 Muwan (Owl) - 178/260 -
12.19.14.17.18)

![]() |
"A man without god is like a fish without a
bicycle." Quoted by
Robert Anton
Wilson in
_Cosmic Trigger Vol 1_, found on the men's room wall,
Larry Blake's Pub, Berkeley, 1977
Well, I picked up "guerrilla ontology" from the
Physics/Consciousness Research Group when I was a member back in the
1970s. Physicists more usually call it "model agnosticism," and it
consists of never regarding any model or map of Universe with total
100% belief or total 100% denial. Following
Korzybski, I put things in
probabilities, not absolutes. I give most of modern physics over 90%
probability, the Loch Ness Monster around 50% probability and anything
the State Department says under 5% probability. As
Bucky Fuller used to say, "Universe
is nonsimultaneously apprehended"---nobody can apprehend it all at
once---so we have no guarantee that today's best model will fit what we
may discover tomorrow. My only originality lies in applying this
zetetic attitude outside the hardest of the hard sciences, physics, to
softer sciences and then to non-sciences like politics, ideology, jury
verdicts and, of course,
conspiracy theory. Also, I have a
strong aversion, almost an allergy, to Belief Systems, or B.S.---a
convenient abbreviation I owe to David Jay Brown. A neurolinguistic
diet high in B.S. and low in instrumental data eventually produces
Permanent Brain Damage, a lurching gait, blindness and hairy palms like
a werewolf. - RAW
agnosticism
agnosticism
(àg-nòs´tî-sîz´em)
noun
The doctrine that certainty
about first principles or absolute
truth
is unattainable and that only
perceptual
phenomena are objects of exact knowledge.
Intellect: The exercise
of
the mind: Results of reasoning: Unbelief. Doubt
unbelief (noun)
unbelief, nonbelief,
disbelief,
incredulity, discredit
disagreement, DISSENT
inability to believe,
agnosticism
denial, denial of assent,
NEGATION
contrary belief, conviction
to the contrary, OPPOSITION
blank unbelief, unfaith,
want of faith
infidelity, misbelief,
HERESY
atheism, IRRELIGION
derision, scorn, mockery,
RIDICULE
change of belief, loss of
faith, lapse of faith, crisis of conscience, reversal of opinion,
retraction,
RECANTATION
incredibility,
implausibility,
IMPROBABILITY
Intellect: The exercise of the mind: General:
Thought
philosophy (noun)
philosophy, ontology, teleology,
metaphysics,
ethics
speculation, philosophical thought, abstract
thought,
systematic thought
scientific thought, science, natural philosophy
philosophical doctrine, philosophical system,
philosophical theory, SUPPOSITION
school of philosophy, OPINION
monism, dualism, pluralism
idealism,
subjective
idealism, objective idealism, conceptualism, transcendentalism
phenomenalism, phenomenology, realism, nominalism,
positivism, logical positivism, analytic philosophy, REASONING
existentialism, voluntarism
determinism, mechanism
vitalism
holism, organicism, structuralism, functionalism,
reductionism, reductivism
rationalism, humanism, hedonism, eudemonism
utilitarianism, materialism
empiricism, probabilism, pragmatism
relativism, relativity
agnosticism, skepticism, irrationalism, DOUBT
eclecticism
atheism, IRRELIGION
nihilism, fatalism, FATE
Pythagoreanism,
Platonism, Aristotelianism
![]() |
Skepticism, Stoicism, Epicureanism, Cynicism
Neoplatonism, gnosticism
scholasticism, Thomism
Cartesianism, Kantianism, Hegelianism,
Neo-Hegelianism,
dialectical materialism, Marxism
anthroposophy, theosophy
Hinduism, Buddhism,
Sufism,
Yoga,
Zen,
RELIGION
Emotion, religion and
morality:
Religion: Irreligion
irreligion (noun)
irreligion,
unreligiousness,
unspirituality
nothing sacred, profaneness,
ungodliness, godlessness, IMPIETY
false religion, heathenism,
IDOLATRY
no religion, atheism,
nullifidianism,
dissent from all creeds, disbelief, UNBELIEF
humanism
agnosticism, skepticism,
Pyrrhonism, DOUBT
probabilism, euhemerism,
PHILOSOPHY
lack of faith, want of
faith,
infidelity
lapse, lapse from faith,
recidivism, backsliding, TERGIVERSATION
paganization,
dechristianization,
post-Christian state
amoralism, apathy,
indifferentism,
INDIFFERENCE
Agnostics
There is something Pagan
in me that I cannot shake off. In short, I deny nothing, but doubt
everything.
Lord Byron (1788-1824),
English poet. Letter, 4 Dec. 1811 (published in Byron's Letters and
Journals,
vol. 2, ed. by Leslie A. Marchand, 1973-81).
Agnostics
I do not pretend to know where many ignorant
men
are sure-that is all that agnosticism means.
Clarence Darrow (1857-1938), U.S. lawyer, writer.
Speech, 13 July 1925, Dayton, Tennessee,
defending
John T. Scopes on trial for teaching Darwinism.
Agnostics
Question with boldness
even
the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve
of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.
Thomas
Jefferson (1743-1826), U.S. president. Letter, 10 Aug. 1787.
Science and religion are not so different in the end, except that in science, the ultimate sin is believing too strongly.
- Marvin Minsky
Muslims in Oslo, Norway, applied for the right to call worshipers to prayers, calling "Allahu akbar" ("god is great") over loudspeakers. The neighborhood council granted the request, to the delight of the World Islamic Mission. A spokesman called this: a "victory of great symbolic importance. It means our religion is respected on the same lines as other religions." But to keep things equal, the council also approved a request by The Norwegian Heathen Society to summon members to their meetings by calling out "There is no god" over the loudspeakers. (AP)
it's fairly obvious
to everyone that comes in
contact with me that i am very much against
any and all organized religions. they have a right to exist of
course, but i will not hide the fact that i feel religion is the cause
of most of the suffering and unnecessary death throughout history and
continues to this day. i will rejoice and
dance the day that all of it, INCLUDING THE
RELIGION OF SCIENCE, gets wiped off the face of this earth and beyond.
however, spirituality for me, is very important. and a very personal one.
there is one organized religion that often gets neglected and dismissed as a non-religions entity: the citadel of science.
in my mind, and
hopefully in the near future in more people's minds, they are the
greatest threat to the methodology of science. the
process of scientific method is a good one and
very practical. we choose to deal with the outcome of science,
and we suffer or enrich our lives with it.
what is bothersome about science is that it works, and because it works, it is often used as a wall to hide behind.
religious fanatics in the guise of science often have reflexive reactions like:
"all religions are wrong."
"there are no
ufo's"
![]() |
and write books like _Why People Believe in Weird Things_
closet cases like James Randi insist upon inflating his ego by "disproving" claims. that's fine with me, except i have a problem with his ego and his smugness. his term "pseudo science" simply means that if it isn't established, it won't be considered. if it's disproven as fraud, so be it. next case. the problem i have is that this involves a very nasty habit of limiting oneself to even the possibility of the wonder of existence. all the revered scientists throughout history have been labeled crackpots and pseudo scientists BY THE ESTABLISHED ORDER. back in the day it was the church. now it is the church of science.
i don't believe in a god, and i'll do my best to argue with classical religious fundamentalists. but i'll also argue the possible existence of fairies and elves with fundamentalist scientists. whether i objectively believe in those things is not the issue. i simply state that they are possible and am willing to believe if given sufficient proof. so far, there isn't enough to convince me. i am not on a crusade to prove that they don't exist. in fact, i want to believe in such things, and will enjoy the process of looking for mysteries, that still have not been proven either way.
remember, the scientists i have a problem with AUTOMATICALLY dismiss any notion outside of what they have been taught in the INSTITUTION of science. meaning that they are simply being - religious. they will insist on an already envisioned outcome and try to prove the inner knower right.
this is hardly scientific.
therefore i declare that i believe in the existence of:
self transforming machine elves
the transcendental object at the end of
time
chakras
crop circles
![]() |
and anything else. have they been proven? well what exactly does that mean? i have never come across historical figures long dead, so why should i believe in their existence? and we all know about "history" don't we?
science is good for one thing:
practical engineering. they are right ENOUGH to make something
work, like getting to the
moon.
![]() |
but as a militant
agnostic, and a
quantum
ontologist, they are hardly the be all end all. i happen to have
fun thinking about the possibility of the vastness of possibilities.
and since my world view is completely based on
subjectivity and consensual
hallucination, it's simply a matter of aesthetics and choice, just like
everything else.
"you are what you cache"
and what i like to cache in my gray matter are interesting things, like the topics mentioned above. if someone else wants to immerse themselves in rocket science and non-euclidean geometry, be my guest. i hope they are having as much fun as i am.
- @Om* 4/27/00
"agnostic in theory, atheist in practice" - before the Bush regime illegally took over the exective branch of what was once the United States, I considered myself a full agnostic, in the sense that i would attack fundamentalist scientists as well as fundamentalist religious scumbags. I've altered this tactic. I see now that the impending theocracy is the ultimate enemy of agnosticism, and must be stopped at all costs. I choose now to practice counterpropaganda, consciously make sweeping generalizations, and label all people brainwashed by the christian cult as potential child rapists. statistically speaking, the christian church ranks at the very top of harboring and protecting convicted child molesters (the true terrorists). the church has now hijacked the government to implement their agenda to make the States into a christian version of Saudi Arabia. i still hold to the term agnosticism as an accurate term, but in practice, during the war for humanity and reason, i will definitely stand behind the atheist agenda. - @Om* January 15th, 2008
A theme throughout
Arthur C. Clarke's novels is the
evolution of the human spirit and man's
innate desire to expand his reach. But he doesn't see religion as the
answer. He calls religion a "disease of infancy," and in _3001: The
Final
Odyssey_, it has become taboo, a
product of man's early ignorance that provoked hatred and bloodshed.
"One of my objections to religion is that it prevents the search for god, if there is one," he says. "I have an open mind on the subject, if there's anything behind the universe. And I'm quite sympathetic with the views that there could be."
"It may be that our role
on this planet is not to worship god, but to create him." - Arthur C.
Clarke
autobiography
![]() |
According to the 13th century Andalusian
Sufi Ibn Arabi there exist "delicate tenuities"
that stretch between heaven and earth like Jacobs-ladders - and the
"meanings" which descend along these tenuities are like angels. I
believe he actually saw the tenuities as nearly-transparent ribbands
of
light, strands of
aurora borealis
pulsing with luminous
nodes like stars falling through gauze
curtains. There's no need to limit this
perception either by theological or
psychological explanations - for the naive realist any experience has
as much a prior claim to ontological authenticity as any other
experience - a spirit is seen or a meaning descends in the same manner
that a soft rain is seen and descends. But how naive can we
be? Never mind - the most advanced science or abstruse theology
leads us in bewilderment back to the same crude existentialist
proposal: since it appears, it might as well be
real. So - if the meaning that appears
in the tenuity is real, it can be traced
back to its source which is real -
or real enough for our present purposes - and this tracing-back is
called (by the Ismaili gnostics) ta'wil, or
"Interpretation." The psychologist would say the knowledge that
arises in this operation comes from the inside - the theologian would
say it comes from the outside - but for us both explanations have lost
power to beguile.
As an
alchemical
process, interpretation transpires in a space
both inside/outside and neither simultaneously; as "hermeneutic
exegesis" (in Henry Corbin's phrase) it belongs to an in-between or
isthmus called Mundus Imaginalis, where images appear as autonomous, or
where
dreams foretell the truth.
In one sense neither real nor unreal, in another sense, perfectly
capable of appearing to us as spirit, the world of
imagination acts as if it were the source
of significances, location of personae, breath of the world. Science
and religion might unite to call this delusion - but for us it is
rather a matter of sheer desperation. The two-dimensionality of
dueling epistemologies, dichotomies, semantic traps, bad faiths - fuck
science and religion - we should demand a rationalism of the marvelous -
![]() |
![]() |
*an end to the violence of the explanation.*
In this context, individuals and groups bear
the
responsibility of making
contact
with their own angels - even the mystic gurus has misled us here, since
they stand between us and our own awareness and pretend to an authority
that reduces us to subjects - or rather to objects - objects of someone
else's interpretation. It seems we cannot escape the imputation
of
an old
heresy
here - based on the presumption that everyone at every moment knows
precisely
what's going on and what to do - if only they can break free of need,
oppression,
and the suffocation of false consciousness - and escape the scarcity by
which authority measures its wealth and its power against us.
Above
all - the scarcity of interpretation."
Hakim Bey - _For And
Against Interpretation_
1980
interview:
PLAYBOY: Of all the values you rebelled against as a child, what was the one you most despised?
GEORGE
CARLIN: Religion. When the Catholics start laying their
trip on you, you notice very early in life what a load of shit it is.
The
hypocrisy is just breath-takingly apparent, even to a child. But what I
hated most was seeing those priests and brothers getting so much
pleasure
out of inflicting pain. I wondered what was wrong with them.
PLAYBOY: Do any other religions interest you?
CARLIN: None of the christian religions do. They're all outer-directed. "Who can I convert?" "Let's go to this country and make them christians." "Wear this." "Do that." "No, don't worship that way. Worship this way or I'll kill you - for the good of your soul, of course." Meanwhile, followers of Eastern religions are sitting in the middle of their minds, experiencing a bliss and a level of consciousness that Western man can't begin to approach. Christianity is all external, all material. Gold. War. Murder. The big churches operate, morally and economically, just like the big corporations. Yet they don't pay taxes. Let them pay their fair share, those fucking religions.
[...]
_Wired_
Interview (February
2001)
Q: There are very few places, even in the comic world, where people are so openly blasphemous as you are. And I love every second of it. Why the absolute, unremitting scorn for religion?
Carlin: I take pride in it. Sometimes people will say, "That's bigotry, can't you see? You wouldn't attack blacks, you wouldn't attack Jews." I say, "Wait a minute, religion is a self-conferred intellectual decision; it's not something you get at birth and is unchangeable. You're collusive with the religion when you accept it; you have a choice." So I think intellectually if you accept it, intellectually I have every right to question that choice you made. Whereas your blackness, ethnicity, homosexuality is something that might be genetic, I can't touch that, and I have no right.
Everything that you know
about yourself comes from thinking back, and I think I saw religion as
the first big betrayal of me. You know, they promised everything. I
remember
at first communion I was seven years old, and they said, "You're going
to feel different, you're going to get the blessed sacrament in your
mouth,
and you will be in a state of grace, you will feel god's presence." I
thought,
"None of that happened." And I can remember noticing that. I probably,
at some level, decided to listen a little more carefully to what they
were
saying in the future and maybe not just buy it all. But I was openly
disdainful
of what they were teaching before I reached eighth grade. And I felt
that
they attempted to lead me astray; they attempted to promise me things
that
weren't attainable through their narrow method.
I think religion is very anti-man. I think it's a terrible distortion and exploitation of a very natural urge every human has--to be rejoined with the one somehow, to become a part of the universe. Once the high priests and the traders took over, we were lost as a species.
Not-knowing is true
knowledge.
Presuming to know is a
disease.
First realize that you are
sick.
Then you can move toward
health
- Lao Tzu
track _Science Of Myth_
MP3
by Screeching Weasel off of _My Brain Hurts_ CD
on
Lookout!
(1991)
"it doesn't matter if
it's
real or not... some things are
better left without a doubt... and if it works then it gets the job
done... somehow no matter what the world keeps turning, somehow we get
by without ever learning.."
![]() |
When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind.
-- J. Krishnamurti, _Freedom from the Known_, pp. 51-52
"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet." - Napoleon Bonaparte
It's important to realize
that the use of drugs for spiritual purposes is nothing new.
Rather, the present interest is perhaps a revival of spirituality as it
was experienced before religion became so institutionalised. It's
also worth remembering that there have been many previous
wars against drugs, and that many spiritual
practices using drugs have been eliminated through persecution. In
India they used
Soma; in Europe we had
witches who made use of
mushrooms and toad
skin until they were persecuted out of existence; in Siberia the
Communists wiped out the
shamans
who used fly agaric. In North and South America the christian
missionaries are still actively trying to eliminate traditional shamans
and their use of psychoactive plants by saying they are devil
worshippers. This not only continues, but with renewed vigour by some
missionaries whose aim is to eliminate paganism by the millennium.
- Nicholas Saunders - _The Spiritual Use Of Psychoactive Drugs_
"I grew up in a mostly
Buddhist environment. My father, when very young, was the first
American to be ordained as a Buddhist monk. He now teaches Indo-
Tibetan studies at Columbia University and is
regarded as this country's foremost authority on Buddhism. When
the
Dalai Lama comes to America,
it's my father who is his host. When asked if I consider myself
Buddhist, the answer is, not really. But it's more my religion than any
other because I was brought up with it in an intellectual and spiritual
environment. I don't practice or preach it, however. But Buddhism has
had a major effect on who I am and how I think about the world. What I
have learned is that I like all religions, but only parts of them."
-
Uma
Thurman, interview in _Cosmopolitan_, 1995
_The San Jose
Mercury News_ profiled
Linus Torvalds in a piece titled "Linus
the Liberator" by David Diamond (1999):
Unlike many in
Silicon Valley, the newcomer is guided by a
strong set of ethics. "There are like two golden rules in life. One is
'Do unto others as you would want them to do unto you.' For some
reason, people associate this with christianity. I'm not a christian.
I'm agnostic. The other rule is 'Be proud of what you do.'"
In an interview (first
published on the web) conducted while
Brian
Eno was promoting his album _Nerve Net_ a few years ago, the
interviewer noted that Eno described his music as "godless." He
responded "Well, I'm an atheist, and the concept of god for me is all
part of what I call the last illusion. The last illusion is someone
knows what is going on. That's the last illusion. Nearly everyone has
that illusion somewhere, and it manifests not only in the terms of the
idea that there is a god but that it knows what's going on but that the
planets know what's going on. Astrology is part of the last
illusion. The obsession with health is part of the last illusion, the
idea that there's that if only we could spend
time on it and sit down and stop being
unreasonable with each other we'd all find that there was a structure
and a solution underlying plan to it all, for most people the short
answer to that is god."
![]() |
![]() |
The primary basis for
theological study, and the big motivator for scientific research into
consciousness, is not institutionalized religion.
astronaut
Edgar
Mitchell describes that as the “exoteric core.” In
fact, the majority of studies are based on the esoteric inner
core essentially, the seeds that planted religion.
“Religion is dogmatic, political, egocentric, and a perversion,
generally, of the esoteric inner experience,” he said.
“Religion is based upon the experience of [its native] culture.
But if you look at the mystic experience (indefinable phenomena in
nature such as
synchronicity,
premonition, etc.), which is the inner core of all this, across all
cultures they’re essentially the same. “As I’ve said
for years in my lectures, if you could get jesus, Buddha, Moses, Lao
Tzu, and Zoroaster and the primitive
shamans
together, they would have no disagreement on the nature of
ultimate
reality, because the inner
experience they experienced is that communion with what classical
literature describes as the godhead; to quote theologian Paul Tillich,
‘the ground of our being.’ That is the same in virtually
all the cultures.'
track _Exile_ MP3
by Verbal Assault off of _On_ 12"
on
Groove
(1989)
To make a decision
That is just a
process of
elimination
A choice to two is not enough
I view both ends with mis
trust
Told to love because another hates
No middle ground to mediate
Your reasoning is tyrannous
I view both ends with mistrust
I feel like I'm an exile
And I think of you
I feel like I'm in exile
And I can't get through
Can't you remember the painful strife
And untold waste of human life
For arrogant judgment of their crimes
We've been too wrong too many times
And those who wish to continue on
Acting as if there's nothing wrong
Blinded by your false pride
We sit and watch and help them die
As the extremes push their ends
I watch as the lines begin to bend
As tactics fail in self defeat
I watch as the ends begin to meet
I walk away
Communicate
Articulate
Educate
Separate
Understanding that mind
makes
reality, one must then
understand why belief is the enemy . Belief systems have often been
created to shape the mind into narrow
reality-tunnels that exclude other
modes of
perception. If you can
control what people believe - as Hitler, Stalin, and other dictators
realized - you have a method of coercion better than a thousand tanks
or the death penalty. The so-called holy wars of religion and the
Inquisition were waged in the name of belief, the idea being that
either you believed in the
True
Religion or you were deserving of death. As
Robert Anton Wilson points out,
convictions make convicts - rigidity of belief and ideological
dogmatism ("there is only one true way") have restrained and distorted
the human spirit for thousands of years. People will do things they
wouldn't otherwise - such as suicide bombings or kamikaze dives - in
the name of religious or nationalistic beliefs. The problem of the
human race has not been a lack of belief, it has been a surplus of it.
He who can get us to believe in an ideology has us under his power. But
ideology governs more than action or behavior.
Seeker1 - _Why Belief Can
Be Our Enemy_
![]() |
MDC - _CHURCH &
STATE_ MP3
off of
_Millions Of Dead Cops/More Dead Cops_ CD
on R Radical (1982/1988)
![]() |
nationalism in school
perpetrating their rule
lying textbooks rant
their patriotic slant
"you're country's great!"
cry the church and the state
"all that've died, were
on god's side"
president and pope your
pride and hope
families build
christian
ethics instilled
the biblical
truth? faith, not proof!
wield a sword walk with
the lord
be a man protect your land
hear your call martyrs all
your life's lost nailed
to a cross
dead on foreign soil for
your god (and their oil)
I see by your outfit you
may be a preacher.
"Yes, I am, - of the
non-theistic, non-sectarian sort."
- _Creatures Of
Light And Darkness_ by Roger Zelazny
"Don't pray in my school and I won't think in your church" - bumper sticker
"I can live without god. I can't live without painting." - Van Gogh from the film _Vincent & Theo_
the terrorists are not only muslims who hijack airplanes, but born-again christians who hijack governments.
W.C. Fields willed his money to establish an ophanage where no religion is preached.
"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit." - Thomas Paine, founding father of the U.S.
Imagine
there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...
- John Lennon
"The world is my country, all mankind my brethren, and to do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine
"The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, and intolerable." - H.L. Mencken
"Religion seems to need violence and violence religion" - Mark Juergensmeyer - _Terror in the Mind of God_
track _I want To Conquer The
World_ MP3
by
Bad Religion off of
_No Control_ 12"
on Epitaph (1989)
![]() |
![]() |
hey brother christian with
your high and mighty errand
your actions speak so loud I can't hear a word you're saying
hey sister bleeding heart with all of your compassion
your labors soothe the hurt but can't assuage temptation
hey man of science
with your perfect rules of measure
can you improve this place with the data that you gather?
hey mother mercy can your loins bear fruit forever?
is your fecundity a trammel or a treasure?
I want to conquer the
world
give all the idiots a brand new religion
put an end to poverty, uncleanliness and toil
promote equality in all of my decisions
with a quick wink of the eye and a "god you must be
joking!"
hey mister diplomat
with your worldly aspirations
did you see your children cry when you left them at the station?
hey moral soldier you've got righteous proclamation
and precious tomes to fuel your pulpy conflagrations
I want to conquer the
world
expose the culprits and feed them to the children
I'll do away with air pollution
and then I'll save the
whales
we'll have peace on earth
and global communion
![]()
The terms agnosticism and
agnostic were coined by Thomas Henry Huxley in 1869. The concept
however has long existed, a philosophical and theological view that the
existence of a god or
gods is
either unknown, or inherently unknowable. The term has since come to be
commononly used to describe those who take a doubtful or noncommittal
stance on the existence of gods as well as various esoteric matters of
world religions.
Many agnostics are people who do not believe in
absolute
truth. Others doubt the likelihood of various
religious phenomena, and reserve judgment. Yet others believe that
people can have scientific or
real knowledge of phenomena, but when it
comes to what lies behind phenomena there can be no evidence that
entitles anyone either to deny or affirm anything. The singular
characteristic of agnosticism is uncertainty or doubt.
Origin of the term
The word agnostic comes from
the Greek a (no) and gnosis (knowledge). Among the most famous
agnostics (in the original sense) were Huxley, Charles Darwin, and
Bertrand Russell. Russell's _Why I Am
Not a Christian_ is considered a classic text about agnosticism. It has
been argued from his works, especially Dialogues Concerning Natural
Religion, that David Hume was an agnostic, this however remains subject
to debate.
Agnosticism is not to be confused with a view specifically opposing the doctrine of gnosis and Gnosticism - these are religious concepts that are not generally related to agnosticism.
The logic of Agnosticism
The logic of the position adopted by agnostics depends on the correct parsing of statements of belief or knowledge. Such statements are not about facts, but about other statements. For example, god exists is a statement about god, but John believes that god exists is about the statement god exists. In the jargon of the logician, statements about other statements are second-order predicates.
There are two possible statements one can make regarding the existence of gods – either god exists or god does not exist. Since someone can either agree or disagree with each, there are a total of four possibilities.
one can:
* agree with the statement: god exists
* not agree with the statement: god exists
* agree with the statement: god does not exist
* not agree with the statement: god does not exist
Joining these with a conjunction, one can derive four possibilities:
1. The theist agrees with the statement god
exists and does not agree with the statement god does not exist
2. The strong atheist does not agree with the statement god exists and
agrees with the statement god does not exist
3. The agnostic does not agree with the statement god exists and does
not agree with the statement god does not exist
4. One cannot coherently agree with the statement god exists and with
the statement god does not exist, since this is a logical
contradiction.
Agnostics vary in their reasons for agreeing with (3). If one holds that knowledge of god is impossible, it follows that one will not agree with either, since each assumes that one can have some knowledge of god. It is not coherent to believe in god and yet to claim to have no knowledge of god, since the belief at the least implies that one knows god exists. Other agnostics simply reserve their judgment, not claiming that knowledge of the existence of god is impossible, but perhaps claiming that there is insufficient evidence one way or the other. Agnosticism is thus to some degree independent of atheism/theism.
One can draw a distinction between belief and knowledge leading some to claiming agnosticism is about knowledge, while atheism/theism is about belief. Since knowledge implies belief, one cannot intelligibly know some proposition to be true and not also believe that proposition is true. Belief does not imply knowledge, but knowledge does imply belief. However claiming to believe something but not know it puts one in a curious position - usually one accuses others of having a belief that is not knowledge.
Modern uses
Most modern uses
focus on the question of the existence of gods
rather than a broad range of
metaphysical questions. The term may be
applied to the simple failure to hold that a god does or does not exist
(i.e., not taking a stand). In this sense, the twentieth century
logical positivists, such as Rudolph Carnap and A. J. Ayer, who viewed
that any talk of gods and perforce considerations of whether one can
know that gods exist are simply nonsense; would count as agnostics. The
" freethinking" tradition of atheism calls "agnosticism," used in this
sense, "weak atheism" (or "negative atheism"). However, some critics
have pointed out that many agnostics live as if there were no gods, not
as if there were any, which makes agnosticism in their eyes a brand of
atheism. And of course non-atheists and impartial data collection
services display the common use of the term, distinct from atheism
(along with secular, non-religious or a variety of other catagories
some prefer to include) in its lack of rejecting the existence of gods.
The term has many uses, however. One alternative first suggested by Huxley states, "In matters of the intellect, follow your reason as far as it will take you, without regard to any other consideration. And negatively: In matters of the intellect, do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable" (Huxley, Agnosticism, 1889). A. W. Momerie has noted that this is nothing but a definition of honesty. Huxley's usual definition went beyond mere honesty, however, and he insisted that these metaphysical issues were fundamentally unknowable.
Some Views Within Agnosticism
* empirical agnosticism (aka open agnosticism,
weak agnosticism, soft agnosticism)-the view that the question of the
existence of gods is knowable but the individual has not seen enough
evidence or there is evenly-weighted evidence on both sides of the
question of the existence of a god or gods.
* closed agnosticism (aka strict agnosticism, strong agnosticism, hard
agnosticism)-the view that the question of the existence of a god or
gods is unknowable by nature or that human beings are ill-equipped to
judge the evidence
* ignosticsm-(aka apatheism)-the view that the question of the
existence of a god or gods is meaningless because it has no verifiable
consequences
* model agnosticism - the view that philosophical and metaphysical
questions are not ultimately verifiable, but that a model of malleable
assumption should be built upon rational thought. Note that this branch
of agnosticism differs from others in that it does not focus upon the
question of a god's existence.
Origins of agnosticism
Agnostic views are as old as philosophical skepticism. But the terms "agnostic" and "agnosticism" were applied by Huxley to sum up his thoughts from that time's contemporary developments of metaphysics about the "unconditioned" (Hamilton) and the "unknowable" (Herbert Spencer). It is important, therefore, to discover Huxley's own views on the matter. Though Huxley began to use the term "agnostic" in 1869, his opinions had taken shape some time before that date. In a letter to Charles Kingsley (September 23, 1860) he discussed his views extensively:
"I neither affirm nor deny
the
immortality of man. I
see no reason for believing it, but, on the other hand, I have no means
of disproving it. I have no a priori objections to the doctrine. No man
who has to deal daily and hourly with nature can trouble himself about
a priori difficulties. Give me such evidence as would justify me in
believing in anything else, and I will believe that. Why should I not?
It is not half so wonderful as the conservation of
force or the indestructibility of matter"..
"It is no use to talk to me of analogies and probabilities. I know what I mean when I say I believe in the law of the inverse squares, and I will not rest my life and my hopes upon weaker convictions"..
"That my personality is the surest thing I know may be true. But the attempt to conceive what it is leads me into mere verbal subtleties. I have champed up all that chaff about the ego and the non-ego, noumena and phenomena, and all the rest of it, too often not to know that in attempting even to think of these questions, the human intellect flounders at once out of its depth."..
Of the origin of the name "agnostic" to cover this attitude, Huxley gave (Coll. Ess. v. pp. 237-239) the following account:
"So I took thought, and invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of 'agnostic.' It came into my head as suggestively antithetic to the 'gnostic' of Church history, who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant. To my great satisfaction the term took."
Huxley's agnosticism is
believed to be a natural consequence of the intellectual and
philosophical conditions of the 1860s, when clerical intolerance was
trying to suppress scientific discoveries which appeared to
clash with a literal reading of the Book of
Genesis and other established christian doctrines. Agnosticsm should
not, however, be confused with deism, pantheism or other science
positive forms of theism.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
