TIL That the term "Agnostic" was coined in 1869 by T.H. Huxley, and not as a description, but as a creed: "to follow reason as far as it can take you, but then, when you have established as much as you can, frankly and honestly to recognize the limits of your knowledge." (britannica.com)
9
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
6 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.
Very good, courageous and intelligent advice.
I might add that having reached that honest appraisal one need not give up. It is entirely reasonable and desirable to forge ahead with experimentation, analysis, metaphysical speculation, and intuitive contemplation, as did T.H.’s grandson Aldous.
WilliamFleming
Level 8
Feb 23, 2019
1
"When I reached intellectual maturity and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; Christian or a freethinker; I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer; until, at last, I came to the conclusion that I had neither art nor part with any of these denominations, except the last. 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. 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." Thomas Henry Huxley
THHA
Level 7
Feb 23, 2019
3
What many people who self-identify as agnostic overlook in this quote is that Huxley "had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble". In other words Huxley did not expect to stumble upon evidence for god, for the simple reason that the god hypothesis is inherently scientifically non-falsifiable. Hence for Huxley there was no room in the concept he was setting forth, for styling yourself "uncertain at this time" and then to use that as a basis to claim open-mindedness -- rather than your status as a freethinker, which already has that base covered.
Thus agnosticism is not a "middle ground" or a waffling inability to make up one's mind about the god question. It is the conviction that the god question, as posed, is inherently unanswerable to begin with.
Given that the god question is unanswerable (a = without, gnosis = knowledge = agnostic), then it is on the belief side a serious problem also, as there's no gnosis to be had to substantiate any god beliefs as reasonable (a = without, theism = belief in god = atheism), so not only do you lack knowledge, you lack belief as well. Two sides of the same coin really.
THHA:
I would not agree with that assessment that it is "two sides of the same coin." An atheist will insist just as strongly that god does not exist as a Christian will insist that he does, and neither will concede that they do not know. An agnostic accepts the fact that s/he does not know, even though they may have pretty strong convictions, and, they are still open to hearing logic arguments. Science is not about absolutes, science is the journey toward truth . . . . . not claiming that you have arrived at some absolute truth.
@THHA -- I am unquestionably an atheist in my own thinking. That is, I do not accept the existence of anything outside the realm of the measurable world in which we all exist. However, I do not have nor do I purport to have adequate evidence to support an assertion that there is no realm of the supernatural or any beings living there. Because of this, I, an atheist, do not make the assertion, but that in no way makes me any less an atheist. I am not confused or uncertain about my position.
I can state to someone that I do not believe in gods of any kind. I hold no beliefs beyond the mundane that we all use to navigate life without cognitive overload. So, I am an atheist. I am an evidentialist. I am agnostic. I am a skeptic. All those terms live nicely together without the slightest conflict.
THHA:
You can't prove Apollo does exist. This is no different from the original argument.
I was always taught that atheists and agnostics never had a creed.
Marine
Level 8
Feb 23, 2019
0
I don’t think there is a collective creed, but surely personal ones.
I find it humorous that the religious keep wanting agnosticism and atheism to be your religion. They claim that you can worship anything. Your car, your wife, your money. All these claims without producing a creed. Very strange.
DenoPenno
Level 9
Feb 23, 2019
0
I find that true as well. I'll accept "religious affiliation" but it is SO not a religion.
@DenoPenno ,
i think dylan meant whether we like it or not or whether we do it outwardly or not. basically we're all dependent on somebody to stay alive.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.