Is agnosticism intellectually honest?

Question

I get irritated with people who say agnostics are just fence sitters who can’t decide one way or the other. It’s not a decision. God or gods may or may not exist regardless of what I think.
Can a person decide what the core of the planet Jupiter is composed of? No! Scientist can’t currently say for sure what it is made of, so any claim either way is pure speculation. The only intellectually honest answer to the question is “I don’t know”. That doesn’t mean scientists are ‘fence sitting’ regarding Jupiter’s core.
I don't believe in the gods of any of the major religions because I have read the holy books and find too many inconsistencies and factual errors. I can't however claim to know whether or not some supreme being or beings or creator exists. How can anyone know?

Answer 1

I always call myself an atheist, but, really, I'm an agnostic, functionally because I know I can't prove god doesn't exist. If anything, the word "agnostic" is more intellectually honest than "atheist".



I just don't bother with the distinction, most of the time.

Answer 2

"God or gods may or may not exist regardless of what I think."

So can Pixie and Elf ;)



"Can a person decide what the core of the planet Jupiter is composed of?"

Ahhh... but there is evidence of Jupiter actually existing.



"How can anyone know?"

IF you were to really think critically you could only come up with god is imaginary.



1. There is NO evidence which points to an imaginary psychopath in space suffering cerebral palsy, uncontrollably waving his arms about, creatin' stuff outa nothin' for no discernable reason.



2. Just by the SIMPLE act of looking around anyone can see that shït happens to all and sundry regardless of ANY thought, deed or circumstance, exactly as if there was NO invisible space chappie pulling any strings at all.



The world works exactly as you'd expect if there were no god.



I have no evidence to back up my belief that Universe is constantly expanding and then contracting but it just makes more sense to me than an invisible sky guy who came from nowhere for no reason *poofing* all this out of nothing, just one time only.



It seems like a hell of a lot of effort to go to just so you can play psychotic games with mere humans offering them Heaven or Hell as a choice when everyone has not been given the same chances to pick the 'right box'… AND… ‘he’ already knows what the outcome is in any case… like, how stupid is that?



Agnosticism: The attempt to turn pussy-footing around a topic seem virtuous while at the same time attacking everyone with the gall to take a definite stance on anything.

~

Answer 3

you're the two agnostic or atheist. you won't be in a position to be the two. i'm an atheist, yet i will willingly say that agnosticism is in all hazard the main intellectually sturdy and defensible place. My atheism is an argument of very sturdy psychological conviction, yet I ought to admit that i won't be in a position to teach there's no longer a god, in basic terms via fact the religious won't be in a position to teach that there is one. Now, you won't be in a position to and are not required to teach a damaging -- the load of information continually falls on people who declare a favorable -- yet actually, in terms of the lack to teach, atheists and non secular individuals are interior an identical place. This actuality renders agnosticism an better place than the two, even nevertheless some human beings evaluate it to be quite wishy-washy.

Answer 4

I say yes. Atheism is basically saying "there is no God", but there is no proof against the idea of a sentient being having a hand in the universe's creation. On the other hand, there's no evidence to say something sentient did have a hand in our creation. There is no evidence pointing towards anything. It's ridiculous for one to say they "know" God or the Gods or whoever exists or not. It's only honest to say we don't know. But too many people have trouble being self-honest like that, and prefer to have a more concrete view, if for no other reason than to be more sure of themselves.

Answer 5

It's intellectually honest because you can't prove that God exists or that He doesn't, but one can safely assume that the chances of God being real are low since we have science to explain stuff and history that shows us that God was a construct of ancient minds. It's not concrete proof that He doesn't exist, but it's safe to make the assumption that He doesn't.



I guess agnostic atheism would be most logical

Answer 6

No, it takes positive Will to assume there is no mystery to one's own life. Agnos (Greek)--is an negative act of will, not an accident of will. Positive refusal is no accident. It is taught, one way or another, by neglect or by direct influence. The natural order is that one responds to his own budding thoughts --and this is the interior soul.



We are not required to jump off the planet and search the heavens, or seek the depth of the sea to know its secrets. In the soul of each baby is a "push" from God called Actual Grace, and it "calls" to its Creator.. Agnostics must be taught negatively, and upon reflection each admits this is true--negativism & neglect is the residence of their souls. The stark absence of never admitting a supreme Being must be suppressed against Actual Grace.



Traditional Catholics of Trent at traditionalmass.org/

Answer 7

An agnostic is perhaps the most intellectually honest person when it comes to religion and belief in deity.



Generally speaking, an agnostic readily admits that they do not know if there is deity or not. That admission alone is a sign of intellectual honesty.

Answer 8

Temporarily Agnostic in Practice is simply logical for the circumstances.



Permanently Agnostic in Principle is fundamentally flawed, and not intellectually honest.



Scientists don't investigate circular triangles either...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wV_REEdvxo

Answer 9

Of course, I don't claim to really know either. Perhaps only the dead can truthfully say whether or not there's truth to matters of spirituality, souls, and the like. Often enough gods and matters of spirituality are just various methods that allow us to make our peace with death.

Answer 10

I myself am a Christian however you do make a lot of sense. Since there is no way that science can prove or disprove the existence of a higher power, it's perfectly normal to decide to be unsure.

Answer 11

People who say that don't know the true meaning of agnosticism. Or the proper definition.

Answer 12

In my humble opinion agnostics are just polite atheists.

You are right that nobody can 'know' but, without a god, you are atheist.

no god = atheist

Answer 13

Of course it isn't a decision. It also isn't a position.



Agnosticism means that you do not believe in empirical proof of God. It does not mean "I don't know," which is the common misconception.

Answer 14

It is more intellectually honest than atheism.



At least that much can be said.

Answer 15

Agnosticism is intellectually honest if that's what you honestly believe.

Answer 16

If you know to your own satisfaction that the universe wasn't created, you are a gnostic atheist.

Answer 17

All atheists are agnostics in that sense.

Answer 18

The problem is: God is the life that is in you.

Answer 19

Yes, it is.