In a discussion like this, I tend to follow Socrates' statement: 'I know I
don't know, while fools don't know they don't know.' But when I stand on a
precipice, I had better know better.
--- On Sun, 17/10/10, ED <seacrofter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: ED <seacrofter...@yahoo.com>
Subject: [Zen] Re: Don't pray in my school and I won't think in your church.
Date: Sunday, 17 October, 2010, 7:39 PM
Next question: What sort of agnostic is one?
"Strong agnosticism or positive agnosticism is the belief that it is impossible
for humans to know whether or not any deities exist. It is a broader view than
weak agnosticism, which states that the existence or nonexistence of any
deities is unknown but not necessarily unknowable.
Strong agnosticism is usually justified on the epistemological grounds that
humans can only experience the natural world and thus cannot know about
anything which may exist outside it, including deities. One criticism is that
this justification is only valid if deities are viewed as exclusively
supernatural beings, but to support such a view one must have at least some
knowledge of the nature of deities. The agnostic reply is, as the natural world
can be explained by science, the defining feature of any deity must be
Since strong agnosticism concerns knowledge and not necessarily belief
(depending on how "belief" and "knowledge" are defined), it may be reconciled
with theism (as in fideism) or weak atheism (as in agnostic atheism). However,
it cannot be reconciled with strong atheism, as strong atheism makes a positive
assertion that God does not exist, without the possibility that God may exist
and just be unknowable.
The viewpoint has also been described in a semi-humorous fashion as "militant
agnosticism", with the tagline "I don't know, and you don't either"."