Difference between revisions of "Agnosticism" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
m
 
(75 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Agnosticism''' is the [[philosophy|philosophical]] view that the [[truth]] values of certain claims—particularly [[theology|theological]] claims regarding the existence of [[Monotheism|God]], [[Polytheism|gods]], or [[deity|deities]]—are unknown, inherently unknowable, or incoherent, and therefore, (some agnostics may go as far to say) irrelevant to [[Meaning of life|life]]. The term and the related ''agnostic'' were coined by [[Thomas Henry Huxley]] in [[1869]], and are also used to describe those who are unconvinced or noncommittal about the existence of deities as well as other matters of [[religion]]. The word agnostic comes from the Greek ''a'' (without) and ''[[gnosis]]'' (knowledge).  Agnosticism, focusing on what can be known, is an [[epistemology|epistemological]] position (dealing with the nature and limits of human knowledge); while atheism and theism are [[ontology|ontological]] positions (a branch of metaphysics that deals with what types of entities exist).  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.
+
{{Ebapproved}}{{Copyedited}}{{Approved}}{{Submitted}}{{Images OK}}{{Status}}{{Paid}}
  
Agnosticism is distinct from [[strong atheism]] (also called ''positive atheism''), which denies the existence of any deities. However, the more general variety of [[atheism]], [[weak atheism]] (also called ''negative atheism'', and sometimes ''neutral atheism''), professes only a lack of belief in a god or gods, which is not equivalent to but is compatible with agnosticism.
+
'''Agnosticism''' is the [[philosophy|philosophical]] or religious view that the truth value of certain claims — particularly claims regarding the existence of [[God]], gods, deities, ultimate [[reality]] or [[afterlife]] — is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently unknowable due to the subjective nature of experience.
  
Agnostics may claim that it isn't possible to have ''absolute'' or ''certain'' spiritual knowledge or, alternatively, that while certainty ''may'' be possible, they personally have no such knowledge. Agnosticism in both cases involves some form of [[philosophical scepticism|skepticism]] towards religious statements.
+
Agnostics claim either that it is not possible to have ''absolute'' or ''certain'' knowledge of the existence or nonexistence of God or gods; or, alternatively, posit that while certainty ''may'' be possible for some, they personally have not come into possession of this knowledge. Agnosticism in both cases involves some form of [[skepticism]].
 +
{{toc}}
 +
Agnosticism is not necessarily without a belief in God or gods. Rather, its belief is that the existence of God or gods is ''unknowable''. It is important to note that, contrary to the more popular understanding of agnosticism merely as an agnostic attitude towards the divine, agnosticism is in fact quite a constructive project in two ways. First, as understood originally by [[Thomas Huxley]] who coined the term, it involves a serious philosophical process for approaching the question of the existence of God. Second, agnosticism can religiously issue in awareness of one's ignorance, which in turn can lead to a profound experience of the divine.
  
==Variations==
+
==Etymology==
Agnosticism has suffered more than most expressions of philosophical position from terminological vagaries. Data collection services [http://adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html#Nonreligious], [http://cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2122.html] often display the common use of the term, distinct from atheism in its lack of disputing the existence of deities. Agnostics are listed alongside [[secularism|secular]], [[irreligion|non-religious]], or other such categories.
+
The term agnosticism comes from a conjunction of the [[Greek language|Greek]] prefix "a," meaning "without," and ''gnosis'', meaning "knowledge." Thus, the term refers quite explicitly to the agnostic's deficit in knowledge regarding the divine. The term "agnostic" is relatively new, having been introduced by [[Thomas Huxley]] in 1869 to describe his personal philosophy that rejected gnosticism, by which he meant all claims to occult or mystical knowledge<ref>''American Heritage Dictionary'', 2000, s.v. "Agnostic."</ref> such as that spoken of by early Christian church leaders, who used the Greek word ''gnosis'' to describe "spiritual knowledge." Agnosticism is not to be confused, however, with religious views opposing the Gnostic movement, that is, the early proto-Christian religious sects extant during the early first millennium.
  
Other variations include:
+
In recent years, use of the word agnosticism to refer to that which is not knowable or certain is apparent in scientific literature in psychology and neuroscience.<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', Additions Series, 1993.</ref> Furthermore, the term is sometimes used with a meaning resembling that of "independent," particularly in technical and marketing literature, which may make reference to a "hardware agnostic"<ref>S. J. O'Donnell and M. F. Krayewsky, "Hardware Agnostic Approach to TPS Life Cycle Sustainment," in ''Autotestcon 2006 Systems Readiness Technology Conference Proceedings'' (IEEE, 2006), 371-75. ISBN 1424400511 See article information [http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/4062300/4062301/04062402.pdf?tp=&isnumber=4062301&arnumber=4062402 online.] Retrieved October 15, 2007.</ref> or "platform agnostic."<ref>Fru Hazlit, [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20060626/ai_n16503613 "Platform-agnostic is the only way to get on in the digital age,"] ''The Independent'', 26 June 2006. Retrieved October 15, 2007.</ref>
  
* [[Strong agnosticism]] (also called hard agnosticism, closed agnosticism, strict agnosticism)—the view that the question of the existence of deities is unknowable by nature or that human beings are ill-equipped to judge the evidence.
+
==Philosophical Foundations of Agnosticism==
* [[Weak agnosticism]] (also called soft agnosticism, open agnosticism, empirical agnosticism)—the view that the existence or nonexistence of God or gods is currently unknown but isn't necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgement until more evidence is available.
 
* [[Apatheism]]—the view that the whole question of God's existence or nonexistence is beneath consideration or concern.
 
* [[Apathetic agnosticism]]—the view that the whole question of God's existence or nonexistence cannot yet be properly answered, and therefore one should free oneself from a fruitless search.
 
* [[Ignosticism]]—the view that the concept of God as a being is meaningless because it has no verifiable consequences, therefore it cannot be usefully discussed as having existence or nonexistence. See [[scientific method]].
 
* 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 deity's existence.
 
* [[Agnostic theism]]—the view of those who do not claim to ''know'' God's existence, but still ''believe'' in his existence. Whether this truly is agnosticism is disputed.  It might also imply the belief that there is something resembling god (or gods,) but a doubt of their exact nature or validity of claim.
 
* [[Agnostic spiritualism]]—the view that there may or may not be a god (or gods,) while maintaining a general personal belief in a spiritual aspect of reality, particularly without distinct religious basis, or adherence to any doctrine.
 
* [[Agnostic atheism]]—the view that God may or may not exist, but that his non-existence is more likely.  Some agnostic atheists would at least partially base their beliefs on [[Occam's Razor]].
 
An Agnostic can also be someone who thinks that the Man can't imagine Pefection (God) because he isn't perfect, it's limited. As a consequence, all religions and tentatives to prove that there is no God are seen as "arrogant". This new point of view has been pointed by Frederico Malheiro, from Portugal.
 
  
==Some philosophical opinions==
+
The [[Sophism|Sophist]] philosopher [[Protagoras]] (485-420 B.C.E.) seems to have been the first among many thinkers throughout history who suggested that the question of God's existence was unknowable.<ref>C. Kannengeiser, C. "Atheism," in Encyclopedia of Religion, edited by Mercia Eliade (New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1987, ISBN 0029098505), 485.</ref> However, it was [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] philosopher [[David Hume]] who laid the foundations for modern agnosticism when he asserted that any meaningful statement about the universe is always qualified by some degree of doubt.
Among the most famous agnostics (in the original sense) have been [[Thomas Henry Huxley]], [[Charles Darwin]], and [[Bertrand Russell]]. Some have argued from the works of [[David Hume]], especially ''Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion'', that he was an agnostic, but this remains subject to debate.  
 
  
 +
Building on Hume, we see that the fallibility of human reasoning means that a person cannot obtain absolute certainty in any matter save for trivial cases where a statement is true by definition (as in, "all bachelors are unmarried" or "all triangles have three angles"). All rational statements that assert a factual claim about the universe which begin with the statement "I believe that..." are simply shorthand for the statement "based on my knowledge, understanding, and interpretation of the prevailing evidence, I tentatively believe that..." For instance, when one says, "I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald shot [[John F. Kennedy]]," said person is not asserting an absolute truth but rather a tentative belief based on an interpretation of the evidence assembled before him or her. Even though one may set an alarm clock at night, fully believing that the sun will rise the next day, that belief is tentative, tempered by a small but finite degree of doubt, since there is always some infinetesmal measure of possibility that the sun might explode or that that person might die, and so on.
  
===Thomas Henry Huxley===
+
What sets apart agnosticism from the general skepticism that permeates much of modern Western philosophy is that the nature of God is the crux of the issue, not whether or not God merely exists. Thus, the nature and attributes of God are of foremost concern. Agnosticism maintains as a fundamental principle that the nature and attributes of God are beyond the grasp of humanity's finite and limited mind, since those divine attributes transcend human comprehension. The concept of God is quite simply too immense a concept for a mere human being to wrap her or his mind around. Humans might apply terms such as "omnipotent," "omniprescent," "infinite" and "eternal," to attempt to characterize God, but, the agnostic would assert, these highly obsfucatory terms only underscore the inadequacy of our mental equipment to understand a concept so vast, ephemeral and elusive.
  
Agnostic views are as old as [[philosophical skepticism]], but the terms agnostic and agnosticism were created by Huxley to sum up his thoughts on 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 of September 23, 1860, to Charles Kingsley, Huxley discussed his views extensively:
+
Agnostic views may be as old as philosophical skepticism, but the terms "agnostic" and "agnosticism" were created by [[Thomas Huxley]] to place his beliefs alongside those of the other dominant philosophical and religious creeds of his time. Huxley perceived his beliefs to be fundamentally different in one important way from all these other positions, whether they were [[theism|theist]], [[pantheism|pantheist]], [[deism|deist]], [[idealism|idealist]] or [[Christianity|Christian]]. In his words:
  
: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. . . .
+
<blockquote>The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure they had attained a certain "gnosis,"–had, more or less successfully, solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble.<ref>Thomas Huxley, "Agnosticism," in ''Collected Essays'', vols. 1-7 (New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1896-1910), 238.</ref></blockquote>
  
: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. . . .
+
Huxley's agnosticism is believed to be a natural consequence of the intellectual and philosophical conditions of the 1860s, when clerical intolerance was attempting to suppress scientific discoveries that appeared to clash with literal readings of the [[Genesis|Book of Genesis]] and other established [[Judaism|Jewish]] and [[Christianity|Christian]] doctrines. Ever since, the term has been used as an important category in the classification of religious belief. The term must, however, not be thought of strictly in terms of religious categorization. Originally, it served to describe Huxley’s position on the foundations of knowledge, as opposed to merely his position on the existence of God. As Huxley himself wrote: 
  
: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.
+
<blockquote>Agnosticism, in fact, is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the rigorous application of a single principle (...) Positively the principle may be expressed: 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.<ref>Huxley, "Agnosticism," 246.</ref></blockquote>
  
And again, to the same correspondent, [[May 6]], [[1863]]:
+
Agnosticism, then, originated as an epistemological process before it became a descriptor for a specific position on the existence of God. To use agnosticism in its most common sense&mdash;that is, referring to someone who considers the existence of God to be unknowable&mdash;is to employ [[Herbert Spencer]]'s definition of the term.<ref>Herbert Spencer, ''First Principles'' (London: Routledge/Thoemmes, 1996).</ref>
  
:I have never had the least sympathy with the ''a priori'' reasons against [[orthodoxy]], and I have by nature and disposition the greatest possible antipathy to all the atheistic and [[infidel]] school. Nevertheless I know that I am, in spite of myself, exactly what the [[Christian]] would call, and, so far as I can see, is justified in calling, atheist and infidel. I cannot see one shadow or tittle of evidence that the great unknown underlying the phenomenon of the universe stands to us in the relation of a Father [who] loves us and cares for us as Christianity asserts. So with regard to the other great Christian dogmas, immortality of soul and future state of rewards and punishments, what possible objection can I&mdash;who am compelled perforce to believe in the immortality of what we call Matter and Force, and in a very unmistakable present state of rewards and punishments for our deeds&mdash;have to these doctrines? Give me a scintilla of evidence, and I am ready to jump at them.
+
==Variations of Agnosticism==
 +
Agnosticism can be subdivided into several subcategories. Recently suggested variations include:
  
Of the origin of the name agnostic to describe this attitude, Huxley gave (Coll. Ess. v. pp. 237-239) the following account:
+
* '''Strong agnosticism''' (also called "hard agnosticism," "closed agnosticism," "strict agnosticism," or "absolute agnosticism") refers the view that the question of the existence or nonexistence of God or gods and the nature of ultimate reality is unknowable by reason of our natural inability to verify any experience with anything but another subjective experience. A strong agnostic would say, "I don't know whether God exists or not, and neither do you."
  
: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.  
+
* '''Weak agnosticism''' (also called "mild agnosticism," "soft agnosticism," "open agnosticism," "empirical agnosticism," "temporal agnosticism") refers to the view that the existence or nonexistence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, given the proper evidence. Therefore, the weak agnostic will withhold judgment of the existence of God or gods until more evidence is available. A weak agnostic would say, "I don't know whether God exists or not, but maybe you do."
  
Huxley's agnosticism is believed to be a natural consequence of the intellectual and philosophical conditions of the [[1860]]s, 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 [[Jewish]] and Christian doctrines. Agnosticism should not, however, be confused with [[natural theology]], [[deism]], [[pantheism]], or other science positive forms of [[theism]].
+
* '''Apathetic agnosticism''' refers to the view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of God or gods, and that since any God or gods that may exist appear unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question of the divine is largely academic anyway. An apathetic agnostic like the eighteenth century French philosopher [[Denis Diderot]] would say, "I simply do not care whether God exists or not."
  
By way of clarification, 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). While A. W. Momerie has noted that this is nothing but a definition of [[honesty]], Huxley's usual definition goes beyond mere honesty to insist that these metaphysical issues are fundamentally unknowable.
+
* '''Ignosticism''' is the assertion that a coherent definition of "God" must be put forward before the question of the existence of God can be meaningfully discussed. If the chosen definition is not coherent, that is, not empirically testable, the ignostic holds the [[theological noncognitivism|noncognitivist]] view that the existence of God is meaningless. So, an ignostic would say, "I don't know what you mean when you say, 'God exists'." The term "ignosticism" was coined by Reform Jewish Rabbi Sherwin Wine. It should be noted that [[A.J. Ayer]], [[Theodore Drange]] and other philosophers see ignosticism as different from atheism and agnosticism, on the grounds that atheism and agnosticism still ''do'' accept "God exists" as a meaningful proposition which can be judged to be false (atheism) or still inconclusive (agnosticism).
  
===Bertrand Russell===
+
* '''Agnostic [[theism]]''' (also called "religious agnosticism") is the view of those who do not claim to ''know'' the existence of God or gods, but still ''believe'' in the existence of such a being. Some agnostic theists happily admit of their ignorance humbly, so they may be able to become closer to God piously. Others, while believing in the divine, may despair of ever fully comprehend what it is in which they believe.  
Bertrand Russell's [[pamphlet]], ''Why I Am Not a Christian,'' based on a speech delivered in 1927 and later included in a book of the same title, is considered a classic statement of agnosticism. The essay briefly lays out Russell&#8217;s objections to some of the [[arguments for the existence of God]] before discussing his moral objections to Christian teachings. He then calls upon his readers to "stand on their own two feet and look fair and square at the world," with a "fearless attitude and a free intelligence."
 
  
In 1939, Russell gave a lecture on ''The existence and nature of God'', in which he characterised himself as an agnostic. He said:
+
* '''Agnostic [[atheism]]''' is the view contrary to agnostic theism: the existence of God or gods is unknowable, therefore one should not believe in said God or gods. [[Bertrand Russell]] called himself an "atheistically inclined" agnostic.
  
:The existence and nature of God is a subject of which I can discuss only half. If one arrives at a negative conclusion concerning the first part of the question, the second part of the question does not arise; and my position, as you may have gathered, is a negative one on this matter. (Collected Papers, Vol 10, p.255)
+
* '''Weak atheism''' may also be considered a form of agnosticism, since weak atheists do not deny the claim that a single deity or group of deities exists. Rather, they only refrain from assenting to theistic claims, harbouring no opinion regarding the existence of deities, either because of a lack of interest in the matter (a viewpoint referred to as apatheism), or a belief that the arguments and evidence provided by both theists and strong atheists are equally unpersuasive, since both bear the burden of proof as to whether or not a god does or does not exist, respectively.
  
However, later in the same lecture, discussing modern non-anthropomorphic concepts of God, Russell states:
+
==Agnosticism in Religion==
  
:That sort of God is, I think, not one that can actually be disproved, as I think the omnipotent and benevolent creator can. (p.258)
+
Although it may seem counterintuitive, threads of agnosticism are subtly woven through many of the world's religions. In faith-based streams as varied as [[fideism]] and the Hindu [[bhakti]] movement, intellectual knowledge of the divine's existence is considered inferior to unquestioning devotion to the supreme diety. Christian fideists would argue, for instance, that human cognition cannot be considered a viable means to knowledge, since it is corrupted by [[Original Sin|original sin]]; therefore, faith in God is the only hope for realization of God.
  
In Russell's 1947 pamphlet, ''Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?'' (subtitled ''A Plea For Tolerance In The Face Of New Dogmas''), he ruminates on the problem of what to call himself:
+
[[Søren Kierkegaard]] (1813–1855), the famous Christian [[existentialism|existentialist]] theologian, is a key proponent of this line of thought. Reacting against [[Hegel]]'s gnostic claim to be able to reach total knowledge, Kierkegaard presumed that God's existence cannot be known with any certainty by human faculties, and suggested that a "leap of faith" was necessary in order to realize God and transcend these faculties.
  
:As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one prove that there is not a God.
+
Although most variations of Christianity claim knowledge of a highly personal and anthropomorphic creator God, others are somewhat more agnostic in their approaches to the divine. For instance, [[Roman Catholic Church|Roman Catholic]] [[dogma]] concerning the nature of God contains many strictures of agnosticism. Consider the terminology used in the ''Catholic Encyclopedia'' for purposes of characterizing God: this being is made from "infinitely perfect spiritual substance," and is further described as "omnipotent," "eternal," "incomprehensible," as well as "infinite in intellect and will and in every perfection."<ref>''Catholic Encyclopedia'', s.v. [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06612a.htm "The Nature and Attributes of God."] Retrieved October 15, 2007.</ref> Each of these terms suggests that the supreme divine being is virtually unknowable to mortal humans as they exist in their current physical form.
  
:On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.
+
Many strains of [[Buddhism]] could also be referred to as agnostic, if not non-theistic. While Buddhist texts feature a plethora of [[god]]s and [[goddess]]es who lack the abilities to create or grant salvation, the existence of a singular, supreme diety is rarely discussed. Most Buddhists believe that such a supreme god may or may not exist; however, the existence of such a divine being or beings is considered by them to be irrelevant in the quest concerned with the achievement of [[nirvana]], or enlightenment.
  
In his 1953 essay, ''What Is An Agnostic?'' Russell states:  
+
==Significance==
 +
Agnosticism is an important classification in the categorization of philosophical and religious belief, as it effectively represents the middle-ground between belief in God or gods and outright disbelief. That said, agnosticism is also one of the most confusing of such categories. For while the term can simply refer to a neutral, agnostic position about the existence of the divine, it can also mean something more serious and constructive than one expects. There seem to be two ways of appreciating the significance of agnosticism: one philosophical, and the other religious.
  
:An agnostic thinks it impossible to know the truth in matters such as God and the future life with which Christianity and other religions are concerned. Or, if not impossible, at least impossible at the present time.  
+
Philosophically, one must be cognizant of the fact that agnosticism in its original sense in Huxley refers more specifically to a serious process for ''approaching'' the question of the existence of God or gods, and also of a variety of other phenomena, through empiricism and reason. To limit the term agnostic to a type of person who is simply unsure about the existence of God or gods, then, does not do justice to the intended meaning of the word. These terminological caveats are perhaps illustrative of how unique and nuanced the position of the agnostic actually: while both theists and atheists form staunch positions as to God's existence or nonexistence, respectively, agnostics remain grounded in a specific mode of thought rather than an ostensible position.
  
However, later in the essay, Russell says:
+
Religiously, if the agnostic is so humble as to realize the extent of her ignorance, then she can be led to experience God in the realm of piety and faith more profoundly than the avowed theist that does not necessarily goes though agnosticism. Agnosticism, then, can have a constructive, rather than destructive, role of letting humans have a profound experience of the divine. It seems related to the spiritual kind of agnosticism that Socrates talked about when he emphasized the need for awareness of one's ignorance in pursuit of wisdom.
  
:I think that if I heard a voice from the sky predicting all that was going to happen to me during the next twenty-four hours, including events that would have seemed highly improbable, and if all these events then produced to happen, I might perhaps be convinced at least of the existence of some superhuman intelligence.
+
==Notes==
 +
<div class="references-small"><references/></div>
  
Note that he didn't say "supreme" or "supernatural" intelligence, as these terms are metaphysically loaded. 
+
==References==
  
For Russell, then, agnosticism doesn't necessarily assert that it is ''in principle'' impossible to know whether or not there is a God. Moreover, "An Agnostic may think the Christian God as improbable as the Olympians; in that case, he is, for practical purposes, at one with the atheists."
+
* Hume, David. ''Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion''. New York: Routledge, 1991. ISBN 0415020131
 
+
* Huxley, Thomas. ''Collected Essays'' Volumes 1-7. New York: D. Appleton & Co, 1896-1910.
===Logical positivism===
+
* Huxley, Thomas. ''Man’s Place in Nature and other Anthropological Essays'', London: Macmillan, 1906.
[[logical positivism|Logical positivists]], such as [[Rudolph Carnap]] and [[A. J. Ayer]], are sometimes thought to be agnostic. Using arguments reminiscent of [[Wittgenstein]]&#8217;s famous "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent," they viewed any talk of gods as literally [[nonsense]]. For the logical positivists and adherents of similar schools of thought, statements about religious or other transcendent experiences could not have a truth value and were deemed to be without meaning. But this includes all utterances about God, ''even'' those agnostic statements that deny knowledge of God is possible. In ''Language, Truth and Logic'' Ayer explicitly rejects agnosticism on the grounds that an agnostic, despite claiming that knowledge of God is not possible, nevertheless holds that statements about God have meaning. This position, however, is valid only in the case of agnostics who define their agnosticism in this fashion. ''[[Ignosticism|Ignostics]]'' define agnosticism in a manner consistent with the logical positivist view, holding theism to be ''incoherent.''
+
* Kannengeiser, C. "Atheism." ''Encyclopedia of Religion''. Edited by Mercia Eliade. New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1987. ISBN 0029098505
 
+
* Ray, Matthew Alun. ''Subjectivity and Irreligion: Atheism and Agnosticism in Kant, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche''. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2003. ISBN 0754634566
==Books cited==
+
* Spencer, Herbert. ''First Principles''. London: Routledge/Thoemmes, 1996. ISBN 0415122112
{{wikiquote}}
+
* Stein, Gordon. "Agnosticism." In ''The Encyclopedia of Unbelief (Volume 1)''. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1985. 3-4. ISBN 978-0879753078
* ''Collected Essays'', Thomas Huxley, ISBN 1855069229
 
* ''Man's Place In Nature'', Thomas Huxley, ISBN 037575847X
 
* ''Why I Am Not a Christian'', Bertrand Russell, ISBN 0671203231
 
* ''Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion'', David Hume, ISBN 0140445366
 
* ''Language, Truth, and Logic'', A.J. Ayer, ISBN 0486200108
 
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
* [http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/humftp/E-text/Russell/agnostic.htm What Is An Agnostic?] by Bertrand Russell, [1953].
+
All links retrieved June 16, 2023.
* [http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv1-03 ''Dictionary of the History of Ideas'':] Agnosticism
 
* [http://www.iidb.org/vbb/index.php The Internet Infidels Discussion Forums''(Worldwide)'' ]
 
* [http://www.infidels.org/index.shtml The Secular Web]
 
* [http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/russell0.htm Why I am Not a Christian.] by Bertrand Russell (March 6, 1927).
 
* [http://atheisme.free.fr/Atheisme/Agnosticism.htm Some reflections and quotes about agnosticism]
 
* [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry]
 
* [http://www.religioustolerance.org/agnostic.htm Religious Tolerance.org - Agnosticism]
 
* [http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/agnostic.htm Agnostic]
 
* [http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE5/Agn-X.html "Agnosticism and Christianity" (1899)] by T. H. Huxley
 
 
 
 
 
{{Philosophy (navigation)}}
 
  
[[Category:Agnosticism|*]]
+
* [http://atheisme.free.fr/Atheisme/Agnosticism.htm What is agnosticism?] &ndash; Atheism: The Capital Man
 +
* [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/ Atheism and Agnosticism] - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
 +
* [http://www.chabad.org/article.asp?AID=68831 "What do Agnostics Believe?"] by Tzvi Freeman, Chabad.org
  
[[ar:لا أدرية]]
+
[[Category:Philosophy]]
[[bg:Агностицизъм]]
+
[[Category:Religion]]
[[ca:Agnosticisme]]
 
[[da:Agnosticisme]]
 
[[de:Agnostizismus]]
 
[[et:Agnostitsism]]
 
[[el:Αγνωστικισμός]]
 
[[es:Agnosticismo]]
 
[[eo:Agnostikismo]]
 
[[fr:Agnosticisme]]
 
[[id:Agnostisisme]]
 
[[ia:Agnosticismo]]
 
[[it:Agnosticismo]]
 
[[he:אגנוסטיות]]
 
[[jv:Agnostisisme]]
 
[[lb:Agnostizismus]]
 
[[hu:Agnoszticizmus]]
 
[[nl:Agnosticisme]]
 
[[ja:不可知論]]
 
[[no:Agnostisisme]]
 
[[pl:Agnostycyzm]]
 
[[pt:Agnosticismo]]
 
[[ro:Agnosticism]]
 
[[ru:Агностицизм]]
 
[[sh:Agnosticizam]]
 
[[sl:Agnosticizem]]
 
[[sr:Агностицизам]]
 
[[sv:Agnosticism]]
 
[[zh:不可知论]]
 
  
{{credit|28247780}}
+
{{Credit|150362848}}
[[category:philosophy and religion]]
 

Latest revision as of 06:46, 16 June 2023


Agnosticism is the philosophical or religious view that the truth value of certain claims — particularly claims regarding the existence of God, gods, deities, ultimate reality or afterlife — is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently unknowable due to the subjective nature of experience.

Agnostics claim either that it is not possible to have absolute or certain knowledge of the existence or nonexistence of God or gods; or, alternatively, posit that while certainty may be possible for some, they personally have not come into possession of this knowledge. Agnosticism in both cases involves some form of skepticism.

Agnosticism is not necessarily without a belief in God or gods. Rather, its belief is that the existence of God or gods is unknowable. It is important to note that, contrary to the more popular understanding of agnosticism merely as an agnostic attitude towards the divine, agnosticism is in fact quite a constructive project in two ways. First, as understood originally by Thomas Huxley who coined the term, it involves a serious philosophical process for approaching the question of the existence of God. Second, agnosticism can religiously issue in awareness of one's ignorance, which in turn can lead to a profound experience of the divine.

Etymology

The term agnosticism comes from a conjunction of the Greek prefix "a," meaning "without," and gnosis, meaning "knowledge." Thus, the term refers quite explicitly to the agnostic's deficit in knowledge regarding the divine. The term "agnostic" is relatively new, having been introduced by Thomas Huxley in 1869 to describe his personal philosophy that rejected gnosticism, by which he meant all claims to occult or mystical knowledge[1] such as that spoken of by early Christian church leaders, who used the Greek word gnosis to describe "spiritual knowledge." Agnosticism is not to be confused, however, with religious views opposing the Gnostic movement, that is, the early proto-Christian religious sects extant during the early first millennium.

In recent years, use of the word agnosticism to refer to that which is not knowable or certain is apparent in scientific literature in psychology and neuroscience.[2] Furthermore, the term is sometimes used with a meaning resembling that of "independent," particularly in technical and marketing literature, which may make reference to a "hardware agnostic"[3] or "platform agnostic."[4]

Philosophical Foundations of Agnosticism

The Sophist philosopher Protagoras (485-420 B.C.E.) seems to have been the first among many thinkers throughout history who suggested that the question of God's existence was unknowable.[5] However, it was Enlightenment philosopher David Hume who laid the foundations for modern agnosticism when he asserted that any meaningful statement about the universe is always qualified by some degree of doubt.

Building on Hume, we see that the fallibility of human reasoning means that a person cannot obtain absolute certainty in any matter save for trivial cases where a statement is true by definition (as in, "all bachelors are unmarried" or "all triangles have three angles"). All rational statements that assert a factual claim about the universe which begin with the statement "I believe that..." are simply shorthand for the statement "based on my knowledge, understanding, and interpretation of the prevailing evidence, I tentatively believe that..." For instance, when one says, "I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald shot John F. Kennedy," said person is not asserting an absolute truth but rather a tentative belief based on an interpretation of the evidence assembled before him or her. Even though one may set an alarm clock at night, fully believing that the sun will rise the next day, that belief is tentative, tempered by a small but finite degree of doubt, since there is always some infinetesmal measure of possibility that the sun might explode or that that person might die, and so on.

What sets apart agnosticism from the general skepticism that permeates much of modern Western philosophy is that the nature of God is the crux of the issue, not whether or not God merely exists. Thus, the nature and attributes of God are of foremost concern. Agnosticism maintains as a fundamental principle that the nature and attributes of God are beyond the grasp of humanity's finite and limited mind, since those divine attributes transcend human comprehension. The concept of God is quite simply too immense a concept for a mere human being to wrap her or his mind around. Humans might apply terms such as "omnipotent," "omniprescent," "infinite" and "eternal," to attempt to characterize God, but, the agnostic would assert, these highly obsfucatory terms only underscore the inadequacy of our mental equipment to understand a concept so vast, ephemeral and elusive.

Agnostic views may be as old as philosophical skepticism, but the terms "agnostic" and "agnosticism" were created by Thomas Huxley to place his beliefs alongside those of the other dominant philosophical and religious creeds of his time. Huxley perceived his beliefs to be fundamentally different in one important way from all these other positions, whether they were theist, pantheist, deist, idealist or Christian. In his words:

The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure they had attained a certain "gnosis,"–had, more or less successfully, solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble.[6]

Huxley's agnosticism is believed to be a natural consequence of the intellectual and philosophical conditions of the 1860s, when clerical intolerance was attempting to suppress scientific discoveries that appeared to clash with literal readings of the Book of Genesis and other established Jewish and Christian doctrines. Ever since, the term has been used as an important category in the classification of religious belief. The term must, however, not be thought of strictly in terms of religious categorization. Originally, it served to describe Huxley’s position on the foundations of knowledge, as opposed to merely his position on the existence of God. As Huxley himself wrote:

Agnosticism, in fact, is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the rigorous application of a single principle (...) Positively the principle may be expressed: 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.[7]

Agnosticism, then, originated as an epistemological process before it became a descriptor for a specific position on the existence of God. To use agnosticism in its most common sense—that is, referring to someone who considers the existence of God to be unknowable—is to employ Herbert Spencer's definition of the term.[8]

Variations of Agnosticism

Agnosticism can be subdivided into several subcategories. Recently suggested variations include:

  • Strong agnosticism (also called "hard agnosticism," "closed agnosticism," "strict agnosticism," or "absolute agnosticism") refers the view that the question of the existence or nonexistence of God or gods and the nature of ultimate reality is unknowable by reason of our natural inability to verify any experience with anything but another subjective experience. A strong agnostic would say, "I don't know whether God exists or not, and neither do you."
  • Weak agnosticism (also called "mild agnosticism," "soft agnosticism," "open agnosticism," "empirical agnosticism," "temporal agnosticism") refers to the view that the existence or nonexistence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, given the proper evidence. Therefore, the weak agnostic will withhold judgment of the existence of God or gods until more evidence is available. A weak agnostic would say, "I don't know whether God exists or not, but maybe you do."
  • Apathetic agnosticism refers to the view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of God or gods, and that since any God or gods that may exist appear unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question of the divine is largely academic anyway. An apathetic agnostic like the eighteenth century French philosopher Denis Diderot would say, "I simply do not care whether God exists or not."
  • Ignosticism is the assertion that a coherent definition of "God" must be put forward before the question of the existence of God can be meaningfully discussed. If the chosen definition is not coherent, that is, not empirically testable, the ignostic holds the noncognitivist view that the existence of God is meaningless. So, an ignostic would say, "I don't know what you mean when you say, 'God exists'." The term "ignosticism" was coined by Reform Jewish Rabbi Sherwin Wine. It should be noted that A.J. Ayer, Theodore Drange and other philosophers see ignosticism as different from atheism and agnosticism, on the grounds that atheism and agnosticism still do accept "God exists" as a meaningful proposition which can be judged to be false (atheism) or still inconclusive (agnosticism).
  • Agnostic theism (also called "religious agnosticism") is the view of those who do not claim to know the existence of God or gods, but still believe in the existence of such a being. Some agnostic theists happily admit of their ignorance humbly, so they may be able to become closer to God piously. Others, while believing in the divine, may despair of ever fully comprehend what it is in which they believe.
  • Agnostic atheism is the view contrary to agnostic theism: the existence of God or gods is unknowable, therefore one should not believe in said God or gods. Bertrand Russell called himself an "atheistically inclined" agnostic.
  • Weak atheism may also be considered a form of agnosticism, since weak atheists do not deny the claim that a single deity or group of deities exists. Rather, they only refrain from assenting to theistic claims, harbouring no opinion regarding the existence of deities, either because of a lack of interest in the matter (a viewpoint referred to as apatheism), or a belief that the arguments and evidence provided by both theists and strong atheists are equally unpersuasive, since both bear the burden of proof as to whether or not a god does or does not exist, respectively.

Agnosticism in Religion

Although it may seem counterintuitive, threads of agnosticism are subtly woven through many of the world's religions. In faith-based streams as varied as fideism and the Hindu bhakti movement, intellectual knowledge of the divine's existence is considered inferior to unquestioning devotion to the supreme diety. Christian fideists would argue, for instance, that human cognition cannot be considered a viable means to knowledge, since it is corrupted by original sin; therefore, faith in God is the only hope for realization of God.

Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855), the famous Christian existentialist theologian, is a key proponent of this line of thought. Reacting against Hegel's gnostic claim to be able to reach total knowledge, Kierkegaard presumed that God's existence cannot be known with any certainty by human faculties, and suggested that a "leap of faith" was necessary in order to realize God and transcend these faculties.

Although most variations of Christianity claim knowledge of a highly personal and anthropomorphic creator God, others are somewhat more agnostic in their approaches to the divine. For instance, Roman Catholic dogma concerning the nature of God contains many strictures of agnosticism. Consider the terminology used in the Catholic Encyclopedia for purposes of characterizing God: this being is made from "infinitely perfect spiritual substance," and is further described as "omnipotent," "eternal," "incomprehensible," as well as "infinite in intellect and will and in every perfection."[9] Each of these terms suggests that the supreme divine being is virtually unknowable to mortal humans as they exist in their current physical form.

Many strains of Buddhism could also be referred to as agnostic, if not non-theistic. While Buddhist texts feature a plethora of gods and goddesses who lack the abilities to create or grant salvation, the existence of a singular, supreme diety is rarely discussed. Most Buddhists believe that such a supreme god may or may not exist; however, the existence of such a divine being or beings is considered by them to be irrelevant in the quest concerned with the achievement of nirvana, or enlightenment.

Significance

Agnosticism is an important classification in the categorization of philosophical and religious belief, as it effectively represents the middle-ground between belief in God or gods and outright disbelief. That said, agnosticism is also one of the most confusing of such categories. For while the term can simply refer to a neutral, agnostic position about the existence of the divine, it can also mean something more serious and constructive than one expects. There seem to be two ways of appreciating the significance of agnosticism: one philosophical, and the other religious.

Philosophically, one must be cognizant of the fact that agnosticism in its original sense in Huxley refers more specifically to a serious process for approaching the question of the existence of God or gods, and also of a variety of other phenomena, through empiricism and reason. To limit the term agnostic to a type of person who is simply unsure about the existence of God or gods, then, does not do justice to the intended meaning of the word. These terminological caveats are perhaps illustrative of how unique and nuanced the position of the agnostic actually: while both theists and atheists form staunch positions as to God's existence or nonexistence, respectively, agnostics remain grounded in a specific mode of thought rather than an ostensible position.

Religiously, if the agnostic is so humble as to realize the extent of her ignorance, then she can be led to experience God in the realm of piety and faith more profoundly than the avowed theist that does not necessarily goes though agnosticism. Agnosticism, then, can have a constructive, rather than destructive, role of letting humans have a profound experience of the divine. It seems related to the spiritual kind of agnosticism that Socrates talked about when he emphasized the need for awareness of one's ignorance in pursuit of wisdom.

Notes

  1. American Heritage Dictionary, 2000, s.v. "Agnostic."
  2. Oxford English Dictionary, Additions Series, 1993.
  3. S. J. O'Donnell and M. F. Krayewsky, "Hardware Agnostic Approach to TPS Life Cycle Sustainment," in Autotestcon 2006 Systems Readiness Technology Conference Proceedings (IEEE, 2006), 371-75. ISBN 1424400511 See article information online. Retrieved October 15, 2007.
  4. Fru Hazlit, "Platform-agnostic is the only way to get on in the digital age," The Independent, 26 June 2006. Retrieved October 15, 2007.
  5. C. Kannengeiser, C. "Atheism," in Encyclopedia of Religion, edited by Mercia Eliade (New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1987, ISBN 0029098505), 485.
  6. Thomas Huxley, "Agnosticism," in Collected Essays, vols. 1-7 (New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1896-1910), 238.
  7. Huxley, "Agnosticism," 246.
  8. Herbert Spencer, First Principles (London: Routledge/Thoemmes, 1996).
  9. Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. "The Nature and Attributes of God." Retrieved October 15, 2007.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Hume, David. Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. New York: Routledge, 1991. ISBN 0415020131
  • Huxley, Thomas. Collected Essays Volumes 1-7. New York: D. Appleton & Co, 1896-1910.
  • Huxley, Thomas. Man’s Place in Nature and other Anthropological Essays, London: Macmillan, 1906.
  • Kannengeiser, C. "Atheism." Encyclopedia of Religion. Edited by Mercia Eliade. New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1987. ISBN 0029098505
  • Ray, Matthew Alun. Subjectivity and Irreligion: Atheism and Agnosticism in Kant, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2003. ISBN 0754634566
  • Spencer, Herbert. First Principles. London: Routledge/Thoemmes, 1996. ISBN 0415122112
  • Stein, Gordon. "Agnosticism." In The Encyclopedia of Unbelief (Volume 1). Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1985. 3-4. ISBN 978-0879753078

External links

All links retrieved June 16, 2023.

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.