Agnosticism

General Information

Agnosticism is the philosophical position that it is impossible to know about the nature or existence of God. The term was coined in 1869 by Thomas H Huxley from the Greek agnostos ("unknowable") to refer to his own conviction that knowledge is impossible on many matters covered by religious doctrines. Agnosticism is therefore concerned with questions of Epistemology, the examination of human knowledge; it considers valid only knowledge that comes from ordinary and immediate experience. Agnosticism is distinct from Atheism on the one hand and Skepticism on the other. Atheists reject belief in the existence of God. Skeptics hold the strong suspicion or probabilistic estimate that God does not exist. Agnostics refuse to make such judgments.

The agnostic position is as old as philosophy and can be traced to the pre Socratics and to the skeptics of ancient Greece. In modern times, agnosticism became prevalent during the 18th and 19th centuries, mainly because of the growing mass of scientific data that seemed to contradict the biblical position and because of the disagreement of theologians and church authorities over the use of textual and historical criticism in the interpretation of the Bible. Many of the best known philosophers have been agnostics. Among them are Auguste Comte, William James, Immanuel Kant, George Santayana, and Herbert Spencer.

Thomas E Wren

Bibliography
R A Armstrong, Agnosticism and Theism in the Nineteenth Century (1977); S Budd, Varieties of Unbelief: Atheists and Agnostics in English Society,1850 - 1960 (1977); E A Burtt, Types of Religious Philosophy (1951); J Collins, God in Modern Philosophy (1959); T H Huxley, "Agnosticism" and "Agnosticism and Christianity," in Collected Essays (1902); B Lightman, The Origins of Agnosticism (1987); G Mavrodes, Belief in God (1970); D Mills, Overcoming Religion (1980); B Russell, Why I Am Not a Christian (1957).

---

Agnosticism

Advanced Information

Agnosticism is a term generally used for the view that we do not know either in practice or in principle whether there is a God or not. Although etymologically the term is applicable to any kind of skepticism, T H Huxley coined the term to signify religious skepticism. Huxley first used the word in 1869 at a meeting of what later became the Metaphysical Society. There are conflicting accounts of how Huxley came to use the term. He said that he used the word as antithetical to the Gnostics of early church history. Agnosticism is to be contrasted with atheism and pantheism, as well as theism and Christianity. The theist asserts God's existence, the atheist denies it, while the agnostic professes ignorance about it, the existence of God being an insoluble problem for him. R H Hutton remembers the origin of the term as related to the reference which Paul made to the inscription on the altar to the unknown God (Acts 17:23).

Agnosticism is now used in a number of senses: (1) as the suspension of judgment on all ultimate issues, including God, free will, immortality; (2) to describe a secular attitude toward life, such as the belief that God is irrelevant to the life of modern man; (3) to express an emotionally charged anti Christian and anticlerical attitude; (4) as a term roughly synonymous with atheism.

While Huxley has been credited with giving the term its present popularity, there were many historical antecedents. Socrates in Plato's Republic is praised by the oracle of Delphi as the wisest man in the world because he was aware of what he did know and what he did not know. By far the most important and immediate precursors of modern agnosticism were David Hume and Immanuel Kant. In Hume's Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding he examines the notion of a "cause". He argues that one cannot know the cause of anything a priori. The idea of a cause arises primarily from the constant conjunction of two objects or things. Moreover, Hume rejects the possibility of belief in miracles.

Such a belief is based upon testimony. The testimony for a miracle is always counter balanced by the universal testimony to the regularity of the natural law. In Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Hume thoroughly criticizes the argument from design. Two of his most important points are that the order observable in the universe may be the result of a principle inherent in matter itself rather than external to it and imposed upon it, and that the argument can never establish the moral attributes of God because of the widespread presence of evil in the world.

Kant was concerned with the limits of human knowledge. He argues that we cannot have any knowledge of things that are not possible objects of experience. Since God is not a possible object of our experience, we have no knowledge of him based upon pure reason. There may be practical reasons for believing in God, but classical theistic proofs were in principle doomed to failure.

Thus, by the end of the nineteenth century there were a number of factors which contributed to the intellectual respectability of agnosticism. The limits of human knowledge had been widely set at the limits of sense experience. Further, it was generally accepted that natural theology had failed, leading to a critical attitude toward standards of evidence and argument in religious matters. Religious beliefs could not meet the rigorous standards applied to scientific beliefs. Moreover, the physical sciences seemed to be at odds with biblical history and cosmology. Finally, questions were being raised about the divine government of the world. John Stuart Mill, for instance, argued that the world was poorly made and arbitrarily managed. The goodness of God was questioned since he was the creator of hell.

In the present intellectual climate agnosticism has taken a somewhat different form in the English speaking world. Many logical positivists and analytic philosophers have argued that the problem with theism is not one of evidence or argument, but of meaning and logical coherence. If religious discourse is understood as quasi scientific statements about the nature of reality and a transcendent being, insoluble problems arise. "God exists" and "God loves me" should be understood as meaningless about reality. That is, there is nothing in sense experience that will count for or against their truth.

Many who reject theism and Christianity prefer to characterize themselves as agnostics rather than atheists. The perceived advantages are twofold. First, agnosticism avoids the social stigma associated with atheism. Socially, atheism is not as respectable as agnosticism. Second, agnosticism at least appears to avoid the burden of proof. To assert or deny anything requires a reason. The profession of ignorance, however, needs no reasons.

While there may be a certain intellectual respectability to embracing agnosticism, William James points out there is great practical danger. James notes that there are some questions that are live, momentous, and forced. One must believe or disbelieve, even if the evidence is ambiguous, or risk great loss. The question of God's existence is such a question for James. For Christians, however, the evidence for God's existence and the truth of Christianity is decisively decided in God's self revelation in the Bible and the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

P D Feinberg
(Elwell Evangelical Dictionary)

Bibliography
R A Armstrong, Agnosticism and Theism in the Nine - teenth Century; J Collins, God in Modern Philosophy; T H Huxley, "Agnosticism" and "Agnosticism and Christianity," in Collected Essays, V; J Pieper, Belief and Faith; R Flint, Agnosticism.

With kind permision: Believe