Late night philosophy: I claim agnosticism in regards to the possibility of the existence of a divine being. The reason I do so is because there simply is no evidence, other than anecdotal (which isnt evidence IMO), that God exists. Thus, in my view, God could exist, and it could not. I differ with gnostic atheists, which refer to people who claim to know that God does not exist, because Gods existence seems like a legitimate possibility. Most likely not the God of a specific religion, but a perhaps an original creator or being whose will supersedes the laws of the natural world. Belief in such a being seems innate in humans, after all, we will never know what came before this universe, and the belief in a creator makes sense. In my view, the possibility of the existence of God is a real one, even if there is currently no evidence to support it, in the same way that the existence of alien life is a legitimate possibility. Gnostic atheists act as if lack of evidence is proof of non-existence, but this is a logical fallacy. If a person claims to know that God does not exist, they must prove it. On the other hand, agnostic atheists doubt Gods existence (due to lack of evidence), but recognize that it currently cannot be proven that God does not exist. As noted, the available evidence of the existence of nonexistence of God or a divine being is basically zero. Anyone who asserts that God exists or does not exist in my opinion is using fallacious logic. (Such people are gnostic theists and gnostic atheists respectively.) The more rational position is one of agnostic theism or agnostic atheism, which refers to a persons belief that God exists (or not) but admission that there currently is no evidence to support his existence (or lackthereof). Additionally, evidence may come be provided in the future of Gods existence or lack thereof, but as of yet, making assertions one way or another is premature. On that note, I personally regard myself as an agnostic atheist. I personally dont think people should attribute things they dont understand to a divine creator, since these attributions have almost always been proven false. For example, before germ theory became widely accepted scientific fact people believed disease was a punishment from God. I also tend to agree with F.A Hayeks words: The liberal differs from the conservative in his willingness to face this ignorance and to admit how little we know, without claiming the authority of supernatural forces of knowledge where his reason fails him. Yet, I dont claim to know whether God exists or not, it could, but I doubt that it does, and I dont judge people for believing in a divine creator.
Posted on: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 06:32:54 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015