I am not religious; I subscribe to a Humanist / Atheist view. (Amy, that is one of the most succinct and useful definitions of the Humanist position I have read - where did you get it, as I may use it myself from now on - if that's OK).
Someone asked much, much earlier on in the thread about the difference between agnosticism and atheism, and said that they understood agnosticism to mean being without commitment to a religion but open to the existence of a higher power.
This is not quite correct - although many people follow definitions of agnosticism that deviate from the original meaning. Agnosticism literally means 'without knowledge' (from 'gnosis' - to know). It is a philosophical stance whereby the holder acknowledges that the reason for, or source of existence is unprovable. The concept was originally developed in the 19th century by TH Huxley, who defined it as being: "...wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can provide evidence which logically justifies that certainty. This is what agnosticism asserts and in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism." Agnosticism is an intellectual concept; its core tenet is a rejection of the unprovable. It is not that an agnostic is open to the possibility of existence of a higher being, but that it cannot be proven.
Atheism, on the other hand, is either non-belief in a higher power (known as 'weak' atheism) or denial of the existence of a higher power (known as 'strong' atheism).




Reply With Quote

Bookmarks