Agnostic Anyone?

[major_merrick]

I've been an agnostic for a long time, and to be honest ( and I know this is going to sound really stupid) it irritates the hell out of me. I don't like it when I can't make sense of things. I really wish I could just let go and indulge in a little blind faith.

 

This was cemented for me when my mom died from terminal cancer. She was a woman who had spent her whole life caring for people, and was a geriatric nurse even before that was a "thing". If there was ever a neighbor in need, she was the first person to try and help. She traveled the world, kept her home spotless, had a beautiful garden and always had a positive thing to say about just about everyone.

 

She developed end stage lung cancer from the radiation she'd had to treat breast cancer years ago. She had chemo, but it caused her to have a small stroke that resulted in damage to a part of her brain and left her feeling nauseous all the time. Nothing helped, and she started palliative care.

 

In the end, the cancer spread to her shoulder, spine and bowel ( it spread really quickly) and she essentially starved to death doped up on so much morphine she was hallucinating and still in incredible pain. I never saw my mom cry until the day before she died...she was crying from the pain.

 

Quite frankly, I I don't want to know the mind of a god that could allow that to happen.

 

I just don't understand it at all.

 

Having suffered in my own life (non-medical) and having known others who have suffered from medical conditions, I thought this post deserved a separate response.

 

The issue of "bad things happening to good people" is a big reason that people have trouble with faith. There are different explanations, and different ways that people deal with it. Some Christians have given it the name "The Problem of Evil" and there are extensive writings on the topic. Most of it relates to the idea of free will, and whether a God who is loving could preserve free will and yet intervene. You can look up and read some of that kind of material, and see if any of it answers your questions or gives you some comfort.

 

In my life, I grew up in a bad home. I raised my sister because my mother didn't want her. My father beat me, my mother abused me. We nearly starved, and I almost died from violence before I graduated high school. I asked God why, never got an answer. My take on it is this - the things that happen in this world are mostly not part of God's plan, and not part of God's will. The world is messed up, along with everything in it, and it is a bit late to assign blame. It's up to us to pick our way through it, and wait for either our death or for the end of time when everything gets fixed. After reading some of Friedrich Nietzsche, I grabbed onto the idea that "whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger." Obviously that concept is limited, but for me it meant that assigning blame for the way life is was a pointless exercise. I can't control the world, I can't control God. I CAN control ME, and with some effort the situations (and even people) around me. If I can do that, and God controls the hereafter, then that is enough. I hope you can find an answer that gives you some peace.

[knabe]

Athiests don't have the need to prove the absence of something which doesn't exist.

 

Regarding agnosticism being more intelligent and logical, this is the type of comment which really gets up my nose. I think it's very rude to say that one person's religious choice is more intelligent and logical than another person's choice. If my children said something like this, they'd receive quite a talking to.

 

This assumption is quite unscientific.

 

And since atheism is not a religion (or at least that is what is consistently proclaimed), then I am not denigrating anyone's religious choice. Besides, I get called any manner of unintelligent and illogical for choosing to have faith, so if it isn't right for me to say it, it isn't right for someone else to say it to me, correct? Because one of people's main complaints about religion is the hypocrisy involved. I simply find agnosticism less hypocritical from a scientific thinking point of view.

 

The topic is agnosticism, and I merely expressed my opinion that agnosticism makes more logical sense to be than atheism.

[umirano]

If you are agnostic, how do you feel others treat you if and when they find out?

 

Most people misuse the word 'agnostic'.

 

Agnosticism does not mean 'I'm fifty-fifty on whether or not there's a god'.

To say 'I am agnostic (to the existence of a god)' is to say 'No one can know (whether or not there's a god)'.

 

At this point you can still be either a believer (atheist) or a non-believer (theist). Non-believers are agnostic, obviously, and even many believers are agnostic. Many people say they believe in god, but don't claim to have absolute knowledge and certainty of his existence.

 

I assume that the OP is asking atheist agnostics about their experience primarily.

 

I can't say that I have many very negative reactions, but I live in a generally areligious society and in an international, urban environment. Unfortunately most people who would have reason to object shy away from a debate. I think a lot of people are married to their worldview and are very unwilling to have it challenged. It doesn't surprise me therefore that strong believers, probably gnostics, are offended by other theist beliefs.

Edited July 26, 2017 by umirano
structure

[umirano]

Some Christians have given it the name "The Problem of Evil" and there are extensive writings on the topic. Most of it relates to the idea of free will, and whether a God who is loving could preserve free will and yet intervene. You can look up and read some of that kind of material, and see if any of it answers your questions or gives you some comfort.

 

It was not 'some christians' who gave it a name. It was the christian apologist who attributed it to the greek philosopher Epicurus, but it was probably some less known skeptical greek philosopher who formulated it first, in its logical form anyway. The so called evidential form was presented by a philosophy professor named William L. Rowe.

 

Also, free will does really have much to do with it. To illustrate my point I quote the two different versions below:

 

Logical Form

 

1. If an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent god exists, then evil does not.
   
2. There is evil in the world.
   
3. Therefore, an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent god does not exist.
   

 

Evidential Form (quoted from here)

 

1. There exist instances of intense suffering which an omnipotent, omniscient being could have prevented without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse.
    
   
2. An omniscient, wholly good being would prevent the occurrence of any intense suffering it could, unless it could not do so without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse.
    
   
3. (Therefore) There does not exist an omnipotent, omniscient, wholly good being.

[umirano]

The topic is agnosticism, and I merely expressed my opinion that agnosticism makes more logical sense to be than atheism.

 

This statement makes no sense. Agnosticism qualifies a given intellectual position. Specifically it speaks about whether the assertion of that position can be known. Any intellectual position. Therefore it cannot be mutually exclusive with atheism or 'make more logical sense', as your statement suggests.

[knabe]

Agnosticism does not mean 'I'm fifty-fifty on whether or not there's a god'.

To say 'I am agnostic (to the existence of a god)' is to say 'No one can know (whether or not there's a god)'.

 

This is what I meant. You said it much better. Honestly, none of us can know for sure there is a god...or that there ISN'T a god. So to say "I am 100% certain there is no god" is actually the same as saying "I am 100% certain there is a god". philosophically speaking.

 

Illogical is probably the wrong word.

[OatsAndHall]

I'm an agnostic in a state that is very conservative and religious. I operate under "bar rules" with people; I don't discuss religion or politics with most people. Yes, I get annoyed with certain current social aspects of organized religion but I keep those opinions to myself and avoid those folks that rant and rave about it. I quietly walked out of a room last week because someone was on a rampage about our "Godless country".

 

My beliefs have been questioned in the past but it is because many people don't know the difference between an agnostic and an atheist. They ask and I keep it simple; "I believe in something greater than myself." That is good enough for most folks as they assume that I am referring to "God". Only the super religious get turned off by it but I avoid contact with them anyway.

 

My beliefs have rarely been an issue for me but that is because actions speak louder than words. I treat people with respect, take a selfless approach to life, and help people out whenever I can. I'm a teacher and a coach and volunteer much of my extra time for kids and community events. That goes a long way towards keeping the religious right at bay around here.

[littleblackheart]

I was raised in France, which is a proudly secular country, and I'm a happy agnostic. I have friends from various religious backgrounds but I've found that the people I get on the most with are fellow agnostic, or at least people who question their faiths and are open-minded about other faiths too.

 

I try to reference it quickly when I meet new people because I don't tend to get along with those who have entrenched views on religion, especially those who are prejudiced against religions that aren't their own.

[umirano]

So to say "I am 100% certain there is no god" is actually the same as saying "I am 100% certain there is a god". philosophically speaking.

 

I disagree. Do you believe that the two scenarios

 

1. There is a god
   
2. There is no god
   

 

are equally likely? The way I see it from the problem of evil alone we can be certain that at the very least all the abrahamitic religions got it wrong.

 

If we're talking about a deistic worldview, which states that there's some sort of god but after creation he basically left, then I guess we could be fifty-fifty about it. It's like saying we live in a matrix or in a simulation. It's not a claim that can be falsified.

 

Saying "There is no god" makes no assumption on the world. We haven't encountered anything that needs a god to explain it. A god could explain certain things, a devil could explain even more things.

[RecentChange]

Most people misuse the word 'agnostic'.

 

Agnosticism does not mean 'I'm fifty-fifty on whether or not there's a god'.

To say 'I am agnostic (to the existence of a god)' is to say 'No one can know (whether or not there's a god)'.

 

 

This for me I usually say agnostic instead of atheist.

 

I do not subscribe to the notion that there is a "god".

 

But I do acknowledge that at this point of human understanding there are unexplainable things... So perhaps there is a power, an another dimension, SOMETHING which us humans do not yet understand

 

I don't believe in a "god" but to quote Rumsfeld, "there are known unknowns".

 

Until those unknowns are explained through EVIDENCE, I will be an agnostic rather than an atheist.

[umirano]

Atheists are agnostic. Show me one atheist who says he knows there's no god. I'm probably the most gnostic atheist. I am sure that the abrahamitic religions have no bearing on reality. Atheists (obviously) don't claim to be able to prove the universal non-existence of every god that humanity came up with so far, which would be the equivalent of saying god's non-existence can be known.

 

So it seems that you are an agnostic theist. Unsurprisingly most people - most believers - are agnostic in the true sense of the word.

 

I also acknowledge that there are things we don't understand yet. I don't, however, jump to the conclusion that a god, or even some abstract super natural force, must be the explanation for them. I see no problem with saying 'I don't know '.

[littleblackheart]

I see no problem with saying 'I don't know '.

 

I'll go one further. I have no problem saying 'I don't care'; that's what the definition of an agnostic is, for me.

 

There may be a god, there may be 12 of them, there may not be, I don't really care. I may find out on my deathbed, by which point it'll be too late and I don't want to waste the time I have in the one life I have to worry about things that may or may not be there.

 

I try to treat others as I want to be treated; that's my religion.

[Bastile]

Is god willing to prevent evil, but not able?

Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing?

Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing?

Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing?

Then why call him god?

- Epicurus