Jump to content

Is Agnosticism Logical?


Unclean

Recommended Posts

I like to pose this question from time to time to the more knowledgeable theists in here. Is agnosticism logical? Or are there gaping holes in logic somewhere?

 

Since there are 1001 different versions, I'll break down my own opinion:

 

It's a modified version of Pascal's wager: if a supernatural entity exists, and it is rational, then it will treat the person who chose to worship the wrong being LESS favorably than the one that remains neutral. In other words, if Zeus exists and I worship Mithras, Zeus isn't gonna be too happy.

 

One flaw to that second justification is pantheism -- if all paths lead to god, then not choosing any god is more damaging than choosing the wrong one. However, I have faith that if a god like that exists, they are rational enough to understand my position. If the god isn't rational, then we're all screwed anyway. :)

 

So what do you guys think? Is this pretty sound?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using the word 'rational' in relation to a onipotent and omniscient being seems alittle strange. What is rational to someone living in an American city may seem insane to someone living in a hut in the Amazon jungle, and vice versa. So to try and understand what a being so far beyond our understanding thinks is rational.... well thats just crazy heh :).

 

For myself, I have yet to come to a decision regarding the existence of God. My dilemma stems from the fact that through out history people have truly believed in whatever God or Gods they worshiped. They had faith and they knew without a shadow of doubt that thier God/Gods was THE God/Gods. Just as Christians/Muslems/Jews/Hindus ect. do today. So why are they right? What makes their whole hearted belief more true and correct than everyone else who also wholeheartedly believed in their God/Gods? Every religion in history has had sacred books, miracle's, signs, prophet's and so on to prove that they were right. What makes todays religions any different?

 

The Universe is so vast that it is hard to make the claim that we are significant to whomever created it. We are swinging around one star among tens of billions of stars just in the Milky Way Galaxy alone. And there are billions of Galaxies, some even bigger than ours. Just thinking about how truly microscopic and insignificant we are to the Universe is really depressing. Its that sort of feeling of being small and impotent that I think helps people believe in a God. It gives you someone who is greater than you, greater than the whole world, who cares about you, and will protect you. Thats a nice feeling. Is it true though? I don't think so.

 

If anything I'm a Diest, which is sorta like a Agnostic in that they don't believe that God can be understood, much less worshiped. A Diest believes that God created the Universe and all the laws that govern it, then wondered off to work on other projects, leaving the Universe to grow, expand and create as the rules and laws dictate. We are mearly an aspect of the Universes ability to create. So while I may believe in a God, its not a personal God, or one that even has a passing interest in us. This also allows for science to happily coexist with God, because science is simply figuring out what the Laws and rules are that God created. Nice and tidy.

 

But yeah. Trying to create a rational Diety is imposible. We could never understand the thoughts or motivations that could drive one such as God to act. We lack the understanding. So, as far a belief system go's, I think Agnosticism is much more logical than than any other belief.

 

 

 

 

Shaftiel

Edited by shaftiel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agnosticism is perfectly logical; in fact, it's really the only thing that is logical. It's a little odd, though, to pose the question, "is agnosticism logical?" and then put forth an answer to the question, "is agnosticism prudent?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I can see, logic can't really touch the question "why are we here" (or rephrased, "what is the purpose of life"). I think that asking if agnosticism is part of the road to get there (finding our purpose) greater than if it is logical. Logic can never solve the worlds problems because people are illogical creatures. So I think that logic definitely has it's place, but often logic gets to take the highest seat in our society, which I think has lead us to many of the troubles we have now. For example, it is logical to educate people to lower std contractions, yet it's a person's heart that will decide for them whether or not they think the risk is nescessary, and unfortunately (as we all know) the heart can often be illogical. ANYWAY...

 

I know I totally skipped over your question by saying that Unclean, so here ya go: if God is transcendant to this universe, then we cant know Him (I'll just say Him instead of he/she/it) unless He reveals Himself to us. He has to intervene to do that, and that's where Jesus Christ comes in. There were over 400 prophecies made about Him, some general that other "messiah's" of the time fulfilled, and some so specific that VERY few if any fulfilled. The fact is that He fulfilled them ALL, that's over 400 made before His time.

 

Now, I'm sure that there are other mathematicians in here, and you can work out the probability that someone would fulfill 400 predictions made about them that were written in a book that took over 1000 years to write. I dont want to get into all the "flaws" of the Bible, cause that's not the debate we're looking for. My point is, it's an incredible claim to make, so it's a place to start looking anyway.

 

That's where I started. That's where I saw changed hearts (illogical, remember). That's where I was pointed to this Jesus, and that's where my own heart was changed. True Christianity, not the watered-down North American Christianity (which really is no descipleship of Jesus, really) - the true stuff is completely illogical, and completely unprovable to those outside.

 

I can completely see where Shaftiel is coming from, and he's right - I cant prove it to you beyond doubt, and sometimes I doubt myself. But this theology, dealing with the nature of God's character, goes beyond logic. I am not what I once was, and I am changed because of God's work in my life - not my own, and that I KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt.

 

So although there is an aspect of not being able to grasp who God is completely (as Agnostics would say), I can grasp more clearly every day the aspects that He has revealed about Himself to me.

 

Wow, that's probably too long, and I'm going to have to clarify a lot, but there it is. Not even proof-read, and my argument is logical (somewhat)! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Using the word 'rational' in relation to a onipotent and omniscient being seems alittle strange. What is rational to someone living in an American city may seem insane to someone living in a hut in the Amazon jungle, and vice versa. So to try and understand what a being so far beyond our understanding thinks is rational.... well thats just crazy heh :).

 

For myself, I have yet to come to a decision regarding the existence of God. My dilemma stems from the fact that through out history people have truly believed in whatever God or Gods they worshiped. They had faith and they knew without a shadow of doubt that thier God/Gods was THE God/Gods. Just as Christians/Muslems/Jews/Hindus ect. do today. So why are they right? What makes their whole hearted belief more true and correct than everyone else who also wholeheartedly believed in their God/Gods? Every religion in history has had sacred books, miracle's, signs, prophet's and so on to prove that they were right. What makes todays religions any different?

 

The Universe is so vast that it is hard to make the claim that we are significant to whomever created it. We are swinging around one star among tens of billions of stars just in the Milky Way Galaxy alone. And there are billions of Galaxies, some even bigger than ours. Just thinking about how truly microscopic and insignificant we are to the Universe is really depressing. Its that sort of feeling of being small and impotent that I think helps people believe in a God. It gives you someone who is greater than you, greater than the whole world, who cares about you, and will protect you. Thats a nice feeling. Is it true though? I don't think so.

 

If anything I'm a Diest, which is sorta like a Agnostic in that they don't believe that God can be understood, much less worshiped. A Diest believes that God created the Universe and all the laws that govern it, then wondered off to work on other projects, leaving the Universe to grow, expand and create as the rules and laws dictate. We are mearly an aspect of the Universes ability to create. So while I may believe in a God, its not a personal God, or one that even has a passing interest in us. This also allows for science to happily coexist with God, because science is simply figuring out what the Laws and rules are that God created. Nice and tidy.

 

But yeah. Trying to create a rational Diety is imposible. We could never understand the thoughts or motivations that could drive one such as God to act. We lack the understanding. So, as far a belief system go's, I think Agnosticism is much more logical than than any other belief.

 

 

 

 

Shaftiel

 

 

May i pose this question then if you made a 1968 gto convertable from scratch you would leave it on a corner somewhere and move on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anything I'm a Diest, which is sorta like a Agnostic in that they don't believe that God can be understood, much less worshiped. A Diest believes that God created the Universe and all the laws that govern it, then wondered off to work on other projects, leaving the Universe to grow, expand and create as the rules and laws dictate. We are mearly an aspect of the Universes ability to create. So while I may believe in a God, its not a personal God, or one that even has a passing interest in us. This also allows for science to happily coexist with God, because science is simply figuring out what the Laws and rules are that God created. Nice and tidy.

 

But yeah. Trying to create a rational Diety is imposible. We could never understand the thoughts or motivations that could drive one such as God to act. We lack the understanding. So, as far a belief system go's, I think Agnosticism is much more logical than than any other belief.

 

 

 

 

Shaftiel

 

 

May i pose this question then if you made a 1968 gto convertable from scratch you would leave it on a corner somewhere and move on?

 

 

 

Well, lets say the person making the 1968 gto convertable from scratch is omnipotent. He can make a 1968 gto with his eyes closed, his right arm behind his back, while balancing on the head of a pin. At that point, whats so special about the car? Sure he might view it with pride, but if he can make it so easily, it looses its importance. God is omnipotent, he is all powerful, he has no bounderies, there is nothing he can not do. So how can anything he creates be more difficult than another? By claiming that something was hard, or time consuming for him is implying he has limitations. Limitations mean that God is not omnipotent, at which point he can not be.... well, God.

 

So yeah, I'm saying that if I could snap my fingers and create a 1968 gto convertable, I would just leave it on a corner and move on.

 

 

 

 

Shaftiel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are some interesting responses in here... and I'm seeing a common theme too. "You can't apply logic/rational thought to a supernatural being". That concerns me a little... I don't think any belief should be "untouchable", and it sounds like agnosticism might be.

 

And Dark -- we can start another topic in this forum about Christianity if you'd like. It's a little off-topic for this thread though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow that was a long time ago. Sorry, I thought what I had typed related to the topic of Agnosticism... lol well at least my train of thought started there. If you want just get an admin to delete it, or I could remove it.

 

Shaftiel - you'd leave it on a shelf because you'd be bored with it. So that implies that God is like us in that He gets bored with things that are easy for Him to do. So if everything was easy for me as an omnipotent being, then everything would be left alone. There would be nothing to move on to...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow that was a long time ago. Sorry, I thought what I had typed related to the topic of Agnosticism... lol well at least my train of thought started there. If you want just get an admin to delete it, or I could remove it.

I'm a mod in this forum, so I could edit/delete it. But it's no biggie; don't worry about it.

 

Shaftiel - you'd leave it on a shelf because you'd be bored with it. So that implies that God is like us in that He gets bored with things that are easy for Him to do. So if everything was easy for me as an omnipotent being, then everything would be left alone. There would be nothing to move on to...

If I can jump in on this one, I noticed you both are proposing "if I were God" scenarios. Where would that discussion take us? None of us could speak for a god if they exist, unless that god appointed us as a spokesperson. And I doubt anyone here is making that argument... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's sorta what I was getting at... like the idea that omnipotence would leave the earth because s/he/it was bored is based on the idea that we understand what omnipotence would be like...

 

which proves, since we have no way of understanding an omnipostent being, that agnosticism is the most logical way to view God.

 

 

 

Shaftiel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...if God is transcendant to this universe, then we cant know Him (I'll just say Him instead of he/she/it) unless He reveals Himself to us...

 

I think there's two meanings to understanding. I agree that we can never fully understand what it is to be God, or who He is. At the same time we can understand who God is and why He does what He does (though, this obviously is not a prerequisite for obedience - another topic) ;) because we are also persons as he is a person.

 

:D

Edited by DarkArchon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ill go ahead and drop in on this one.

 

Dark despite our differences on our understanding of God's wrath and his love, I do agree that there is indeed a God.

 

Concerning the GTO and leaving it on a corner...

It is one thing to snap your fingers and create a vehicle, but its another thing to make love to the most beautiful woman in the world and have a child who, when you come home from work, runs to you hugging tightly saying "daddy! Daddy!".

 

As you're well aware of how children are made (I know you know from your spraypaint in source haha kidding), it's simple as snapping a finger, it just takes a bit longer and a lot of pain. However even if it was instant and painless, you would love the child no less.

For you who have no children and are reasonable people, you will one day understand when your child weeps for you and your heart breaks. (ask mr. duke about this).

 

So a car is one thing but a child and a spouse are another.

 

Aug

Edited by auggybendoggy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more thing, Dark.

The prophecies can be hand written, at least I believe they can. In other words the one who wrote matt could eaisly have gone back to the OT and wrote what Jesus did. This is a huge claim by the atheist.

 

I'm not sure theres much defense on behalf of the christian for this.

 

I do notice one point that I'll make.

 

I find this hard to buy concerning the hindsight argument...

thousands of years before the cross was used as a punishment (persia first, chaldeans, greeks to romans) the hebrews had a very certain event recorded...

 

Moses delivered Isreal from bondage (read romans 11)

They were delivered at the death of the first born son (read the gospels)

a lamb without defect was to be slaughtered that night (read the gospels)

the blood of the lamb was to go on the center top, center left and center right of the door frame.

Now if the top drips to the bottom then the symbol it creates is something that the NT writers had no control over...

the death of the first born son (hingsight)

release from bongage (hindsight)

blood of the lamb (hindsight)

symbol of a cross (NON HINDSIGHT)

 

other countries deployed the cross and jews had no way of controlling this. Thus I find it interesting that this symbol is

beyond the scope of the NT writers to make happen and yet in the story these symbols are consistent with the gospels.

 

To be more clear my point of hindsight means they (the NT writers) could look back throught the OT and MAKE a story

fit the OT so that if looks like prophecys are fullfilled. However, they had no control over the usage of the "cross" as a

punishement tool and so the ? becomes...

 

How did the OT writers know that symbol would be used if indeed it is seen as a symbol of the cross?

 

Now this is contigent on the fact that some would argue that the blood on the door frames did not make the symbol

of the cross and therfore this point is useless. I agree.

 

But if one believes it does make a symbol of the cross then it is TRULY A MIRACLE THAT CANNOT BE CONJURED UP.

 

Aug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alright, back on track.

 

Why would we ALL be screwed if the entity is not rational. That seems to be a christian viewpoint from their understanding of who God is to them.

Perhaps a few would be screwed if the god is not rational. Perhaps only 1 would be screwed if the god is irrational. Perhaps no one gets screwed even if the god is irrational.

 

Is "rational" mean that good things happen to mankind? Perhaps this is saftiels point, that "rational" is hard to define. It can differ from person to person and especially from a supernatural being to a natural being.

 

I do see your point that if all roads lead to God then agnoticism is the worse position one could hold. However could it be said that agnosticim is a road that leads to god? I'm just not sure the logic follows.

 

Aug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...