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.
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
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"."





Reply via email to