Weak agnosticism, or empirical agnosticism (also negative agnosticism), is the belief that the existence or nonexistence of deities is currently unknown, but is not necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgment until more evidence is available.
Weak agnosticism is in contrast to strong agnosticism, in which the agnostic believes that the existence of any gods is not only unknown, but is also unknowable to humanity. Neither type of agnosticism is fully irreconcilable with theism (belief in a deity or deities) nor strong atheism. A weak agnostic who also considers themselves a theist is likely in a state of doubt, though they are not necessarily having a crisis of faith. Weak agnosticism often overlaps with, and is often confused with, weak atheism, as both are a lack of belief rather than a belief in lack (of either knowledge or existence, respectively).
Contents [hide]
1 Weak agnosticism and symbolic logic
2 Weak agnosticism vs indecision
3 Criticism against weak agnosticism and response
4 Bibliography
[edit]
Weak agnosticism and symbolic logic
The philosophy of weak agnosticism can be related to proof theory and can be expressed in terms of symbolic logic. Simply, if a person makes a statement A and claims that it is true, then he must prove that it is true. Similarly, if another person makes a statement A' (not A) and claims that it is true (or rather A is false), then he too must prove that it is true (or A false).
[edit]
Weak agnosticism vs indecision
Weak agnostics have often been accused of indecision, that is, "fence-sitters." This arises from a misunderstanding of weak agnosticism. The principle of weak agnosticism is not about a belief in God or a disbelief in God but about the belief in the statement "God exists" or the belief in the statement "God does not exist". Given that, to a weak agnostic, nothing has been shown to support either statement conclusively, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the data is inconclusive and believing in either is a leap of faith.
[edit]
Criticism against weak agnosticism and response
Some atheists argue that believing in the possibility of a God is as ridiculous as believing in the possibility of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and so forth, and find it contradictory that weak agnostics believe in the possibility of the former but not any of the latter. However, to a weak agnostic, this fails to assess the situation logically and with clearly defined lines. To a weak agnostic the concepts of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Christian God, and so forth, are clearly defined claims akin to claiming the existence of alien life on a specific planet in our solar system, whereas the general concept of God is more akin to the concept of alien life anywhere in the universe. Given that Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and so forth, can be argued against using proofs and data, it is not contradictory to dismiss those things that can be disproven while keeping an open mind to those things that have not.
2006-09-08 06:42:35 · 40 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Do "deities" exist? Are they living entities or only concepts?
Don't you think that the concept of "deity" itself intrinsically blocks any investigation about its existence as an entity?
Are deities transcendantal entities or merely concepts?
How can a concept exist?
"Does "transcendantal" mean "something beyond existence itself"?
If I were you, I would study the 3 words of your question:
- does: tense, action/state;
- god: transcendantal symbol or deity worshiped by Christians;
- exist: as entity or as data.
Well, given that you are talking about something transcendantal, questioning its existence is a non-sense, in my view.
Agnostics wonder about the existence/non-existence of "transcendantal".
Atheists don't.
.
.
2006-09-08 07:50:30 · answer #1 · answered by Axel ∇ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Many concepts of God(s) exist. The problem is the vast majority of these concepts are either self defeating (contain irreconcilable qualities or claims) or they make no testable prediction at all. In either case they are not scientifically useful concepts. There is no evidence that could be presented for God that eliminates other possible explanations. It is also easy to see that anything that is supposed to be relevant to human experience (especially on the scale of a God) should be accessible to human experience. Thus I do not believe either Weak Agnosticism or most ideas of God(s) are commensurate with empiricism at all.
There are exceptions to the above charge against ideas about God(s), but they reshape the idea so as to be unrecognizeable to most theists . For instance, one could create a testible idea of God that is strikingly similar to the modern description of the quantum vacuum by removing the idea of personality and causality from the divine. Advaita Vedanta is a clear example of just this type of belief.
2006-09-08 07:11:38 · answer #2 · answered by neil s 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whew! that was a lot of information to say that agnostics havent made up their mind yet.
That is not a reason for others to ridicule the agnostic, from those who have made a decision (either way).
Personally, I give the agnostic credit for
1) wanting evidence
2) not closing his mind
and so on
I just hope that he will make a decision before it is too late. It would be nice to have everyone in paradise.
2006-09-08 06:51:35 · answer #3 · answered by grammy_of_twins_plus two 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The agnostic is a person who says he has no means of attaining a scientific knowledge of the unseen world or of the future; by which somewhat loose phraseology presumably means the theological unseen world and future. I cannot think this description happy, either in form or substance.
Easily, lost to a person within themselves.
2006-09-08 07:37:47 · answer #4 · answered by beedaduck 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I perceive that there is a God, but I don't expect you to understand that....The issue is, can we live at peace with each other?
I say, sure....I mind my own business and am very content in my life. I am OK with agnostics/atheists not believing in God or thinking I am crazy or dumb...That doesn't make them right at least on the dumb part.... I have a master's degree from Vanderbilt with a 4.0 GPA :)
2006-09-08 07:16:06 · answer #5 · answered by Denise W 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Does god exist? Nope, I don't think so.
I read this a bunch of times, looking for other questions you might have been asking, but know what? I'm tired. I don't wanna give an essay answer to an essay question. Hope ya don't mind. =)
2006-09-08 06:58:14 · answer #6 · answered by ♥Mira♥ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Too many words. Why must everything be labeled and categorized? Is that the mind of the Western man? Don't you want to quantify it too?
Sorry to be rude but this is a lame question.
2006-09-08 06:47:32 · answer #7 · answered by a_delphic_oracle 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I would classify myself as a weak agnostic...
It's nice to see people really took the time to read and understand.....
2006-09-08 06:47:20 · answer #8 · answered by Bobby W 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't believe he exists. But I concede that we do not have proof either way. I choose to call myself an atheist, because if he does exist I don't like him anyways.
2006-09-08 06:53:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
God doesn't exist it was a fairy tale to keep young children in check that got out of hand
2006-09-08 06:45:25 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋