Theism: 1. Belief in the existence of a God or gods, especially belief in a personified God entity as creator.
Atheism: 1. Belief that there is no God. 2. Disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Agnosticism: 1. The doctrine that certainty about truth is unattainable without proof, and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact knowledge. 2. A doctrine affirming that there can be no proof either that god exists or that god does not exist.
The most notable and relevant difference between these definitions is that two of them (theism and atheism) describe suppositions based on an unknown, both of which represent a departure from critical thinking and enter the realm of believing in something based on feeling, whereas agnosticism describes a neutral conclusion about knowledge based on a lack of evidence. Knowledge (information gained by proof) is a separate issue from a belief in something for the want of it.
The term 'agnosticism' is predominately used to claim abstinence from siding with the belief or non-belief in the existence of a God or gods. But by definition, agnosticism enjoys a broader meaning. Agnosticism is rooted in logic; a position that does not permit a claim of something unknowable or predicated by negative proof. Both theism and atheism claim to have knowledge based on a negative proof (also known as a faulty inference), which constitutes a logical absurdity. To the agnostic, all such proposals, are equally untenable. Consequently, agnosticism is not a withdrawal from participation, but rather a position of non-participation because there is nothing to contend.
True agnosticism includes no opinion about the existence, or non-existence of God or gods. As an adjective, 'agnostic' can be used with theism or atheism. One might believe in gods without claiming absolute knowledge of their existence, a position which could be described as agnostic theism. Conversely one might disbelieve in gods without claiming absolute knowledge of their non-existence, which could be described as agnostic atheism.
For years I called myself a true agnostic with no emotional investment in the belief or disbelief in the existence of God - most likely my religiously fraught childhood instilled in me at least some modicum of belief that there may be a god presiding over my possible continuance beyond the duration of my biological form; a god that may very well deny extended existence to non-believers, yet show leniency toward those who simply claimed not to know what cannot be known. However, brainwashing in youth dissipates with intellectual maturation, and the notion that persistence after death might be presided over by some deity, is recognized for the fairy tale that it is. This concession is an implicit acceptance of atheism - a disbelief derived from nothing more substantial than the same disbelief I have in the existence of Santa Claus - it seems unreasonable. Nevertheless, holding that something is unreasonable without proven data to support the conclusion still constitutes a belief not held in evidence, and consequently represents a departure from pure logic of which, I confess my guilt. However, I qualify my departure from pure logic to an atheistic belief with the 'agnostic' adjective. I don't believe there is or ever was a god (atheist), but withhold judgment about proving this belief (agnostic) since such a thing cannot be verified. My use of the agnostic adjective with my atheist belief does not redeem my departure from pure logic on this matter, but it does qualify and explain my refusal to engage in a discussion about the consequences and/or rewards of being naughty or nice.
~
No comments:
Post a Comment