Agnosticism: An introduction

Atheism and Agnosticism

Philosophy of Religion

Recently added to the site

Information: This article gives a brief review of matters related to agnosticism. A version of this article was originally published on the website www.faithnet.org.uk.

Introduction

'On a purely empirical basis the question of whether God exists or not simply cannot be decided one way or another, and to keep going on about it is to keep banging your head against the wall.' (Mark Vernon, After God, Interview for That Religious Studies Website)

Unlike atheists, agnostics hold the question of God's existence open. For instance, we often find atheists arguing that if there were a God then we would surely be able to prove this. Agnostics on the other hand often draw attention to problems associated with criteria and verification, and how we might conclusively prove/disprove God's existence. Also, whereas atheists tend to claim that a lack of evidence is indicative of God's non-existence, agnostics often follow lines of reasoning which argue that being unable to conclusively prove that God does/does not exist does not necessarily mean that God does not exist, but instead might mean we have limited methods of enquiry, or even a limited cognitive ability to know who or what God is.

Something to do: Find out what the word 'cognitive' means.

Copyright Stephen A Richards The German Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) argued that our knowledge of things in the world is filtered by certain cognitive factors. For instance, Kant said that we cannot have knowledge of things in the world as they truly are, but only as they are experienced by us through the concepts of space and time. This means that (according to Kant), we only ever experience the world in a finite and limited way. However, if Kant is correct then this is clearly going to affect what we might claim to know of an infinite God, and logically implies that knowing anything about an infinite God is paradoxical.

Agnostics also treat the matter of God's existence as an unresolved (open) issue, due to the numerous arguments Philosophers and Theologians have presented over the years both for and against God's existence (or non-existence).

The origin of the term 'agnostic'

Thomas H. Huxley (1825-1895), noted English biologist and early advocate of Darwin's theory of evolution, coined the term 'agnosticism' in the 1840's by combining "a" (which implies negative), with "gnosis" (a Greek word meaning knowledge):

'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; a 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 or part with any of these denomination, except the last… So I 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 Huxley)

The interesting point Huxley makes here, is that the more he learnt about the different arguments pertaining to God's existence, and the more he saw that people had different beliefs about God, the more open-ended his personal belief in God became. As such, we might say that that antithesis of agnosticism (for him) is the idea that there is one fixed and true position in terms of God's existence (which can include both theistic and atheistic approaches).

It is said that Huxley was vehemently opposed to any sort of religious extremism.

Types of agnosticism

There are two ways one can be agnostic about the matter of God's existence:

Theistic agnosticism: The evidence seems to suggest that God might exist, but we cannot be certain that God does due to the presence of significant of counter-evidence.
Atheistic agnosticism: The evidence seems to suggest that God might not exist, but we cannot be that certain God does not (also due to the presence of significance of counter-evidence).

"I may say that the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God; but whether this is an argument of real value, I have never been able to decide. I am aware that if we admit a first cause, the mind still craves to know whence it came from and how it arose. Nor can I overlook the difficulty from the immense amount of suffering through the world. I am, also, induced to defer to a certain extent to the judgment of many able men who have fully believed in God; but here again I see how poor an argument this is. The safest conclusion seems to me to be that the whole subject is beyond the scope of man's intellect." (Charles Darwin)

Both the theistic and atheistic forms of agnosticism (above) relate to the matter of God's existence. However, one could also be agnostic about what we might know of who or what God is. For instance, one could claim that God exists but at the same time highlight the many difficulties associated with knowing who or what this deity is (what I call epistemological agnosticism).

The theologian Paul Tillich (1886-1965) claimed that we cannot really know what God is like because (following a similar line of reasoning to Kant), our knowledge of God is always limited in some way. Just as the sun shines through a stained glass window to illuminate it, so Tillich argued that the reality of God 'illuminates' the ideas, language and symbols we use to express our belief in God. If true, this means we can never really know and express the true reality of who or what God is.

A stained glass window (Copyright Stephen A Richards)

However, as we noted earlier one issue concerning our knowledge of God (which can lead to epistemological agnosticism), is how finite creatures can know (and understand) anything of an infinite God.

Isn't agnosticism really atheism?

One of the problems agnostics have is explaining how their belief differs from atheism. Although agnostics hold the matter of God's existence open, the fact is that they do not commit themselves to the belief that God exists in the same way theists do. Of course, unlike atheists agnostics do not categorically deny God's existence, but neither do they believe that God unquestionably exists either. All this might suggest that despite what agnostics say, the fact is that they are simply denying that they are really (closet) atheists.

Although we must draw a (fine) line between their respective views, setting out the difference between agnosticism and atheism is tricky, and no more so than when truth is being grounded in an either/or principle. For example:

Either God exists (theism) or
Either God does not exist (atheism)

Now in an ultimate (objective) sense, one of these statements is going to be necessarily true (that is either God does exist or God does not exist). The problem is that agnostics seem to want to fall somewhere in the middle:

God may or may not exist (agnosticism)

Looking at the matter this way, agnosticism seems to be saying nothing significant about the matter of God's existence. For instance, the claim God may or may not exist is simply a tautology (a statement which says nothing new), and is doing no more than stating the obvious!

However, the difference between atheism and agnosticism on this matter is more to do with how each of them responds to the evidence for and against God's existence. Atheists have committed themselves to the belief that God does not exist (despite the existence of counter-evidence), whereas agnostics are simply unwilling to do so. Of course, both atheists and agnostics would agree that either God does exist, or God does not exist. However, the difference between them is that agnostics are willing to hold open the matter (due to the presence of counter-evidence), whereas atheists are not (despite the presence of counter-evidence).

On a purely practical level though, I would argue that one cannot practice a faith as an agnostic. For instance, I do not believe there are Christian agnostics who pray to a God who might or might be there. Either you are praying to a God who is there, or you are not. Instead, I believe agnostics tend to live as practical atheists; that is they live more as if God does not exist, than if God did:

'I do go to church from time to time, though I prefer places like cathedrals where the music and architecture speaks louder than any words the priest say - and even when they do speak, you are more likely to hear something intelligent.' (Mark Vernon, After God, Interview for That Religious Studies Website)

'I don't spend much time thinking about whether God exists. I don't consider that a relevant question. It's unanswerable and irrelevant to my life, so I put it in the category of things I can't worry about.' (Wendy Kaminer)

Something to think about:Are you a theist, atheist or agnostic, and why?