9 1

"Holier-Than-Thou Agnosticism: the proponent fails to justify their agnosticism with respect to traditional theism, but dogmatically sticks to it anyway, insisting it's their opponents that are being dogmatic and lacking in humility, unlike their good selves.

Stephen Law - a prominent secular philosopher at Heythorpe College UK Twitter @stephenlaw60

Does he have a point? , fellow agnostics?

By Mcflewster
Options Favorite Like

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence, and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy

Create your free account

9 comments

0

Anybody who refuses to demonstrate the existence of their particular deity or deities while proclaiming the existence thereof is at best a fool and at worst a charlatan. And I have no issue with appearing to be a dogmatic arrogant bastard in maintaining this position.

And I am not an agnostic.

irascible Level 8 Dec 8, 2018
Reply

I have theory that if you think scientifically you cannot be anything else but agnostic - but then you may dislike science as is your right.
Why set out to discover something if you know the answer anyway?

@Mcflewster It is trivial to show that both the God of the Bible and the God of the Torah cannot exist. Nobody has produced any falsifiable evidence to support the existence claims of any other gods in the last 5,000 years. As such, all those other gods remain fictional.

For your information, I use the Scientific Method as a matter of course.

1

The statement shows little sense. How do you justify a lack of knowledge? If I ask a theist to demonstrate how they know something to be true, that is not dogma, it is a genuine request to try to understand why they believe the dogma of their religion. That said, I am not agnostic to the god claims of traditional theism, as I know that the traditional Norse, Greek and Abrahamic gods do not, and cannot, exist in the way in which they are described.

I have no burden of proof to not believe their claims. I will not believe their assertions until they can demonstrate that their assertions are true.

Uncorrugated Level 7 Dec 8, 2018
Reply
1

Ought not be arguing over religion in the first place. No one has the least idea of what they’re talking about.

WilliamFleming Level 7 Dec 6, 2018
Reply
2

That's why, with respect to "traditional theism" it's much easier to be an atheist.

Bierbasstard Level 8 Dec 6, 2018
Reply
2

This sounds like a ridiculous argument to me, and it would be exhausting to enter into debating it. You either have faith or you don’t, I don’t . For me to argue why I don’t have faith would not be dogmatic it would be fact. I have no dogma, just a lack of belief ....the dogma must belong on the other side of the argument by definition, as I have no creed or dogma, unless you count incredulity as dogma.

Marionville Level 8 Dec 6, 2018
Reply
2

Stephen seems to feel that an agnostic needs to justify their agnosticism. Why? Unless my faith/lack thereof is important to getting a job, getting into school, or getting some other valuable outcome (and I don't know why it would be relevant, except in a few very specific instances, like wanting to go to a religious college or get married in a church), what I believe is no one's business but my own, and I do not owe anyone an explanation of it.

My general philosophy is: You disagree with me? Fine. You want to argue with me? I'm not going to waste my time.

citronella Level 7 Dec 6, 2018
Reply

I don't waste my time debating beliefs either

4

I suspect there COULD be a point to this. Both atheists and agnostics alike, tend to define the term incorrectly.

Having said that, there DOES tend to be a lot of dogmatism on the atheist side. Making the lack of humility accusation. . . amusing.

Mb_Man Level 5 Dec 6, 2018
Reply

Deep thinking ! Well balanced.

I am utterly ruthless in the application of reason and logic to the God question. I have zero humility in that regard.

3

Would be nice if he identified who "the proponent" is that he is referring too. As it stands, it's a straw man. Not worth arguing about.

John_Tyrrell Level 7 Dec 6, 2018
Reply
2

"fails to justify their agnosticism with respect to traditional theism". Why on earth should they? After all it is not that we know ANY answers as theists do

Mcflewster Level 6 Dec 6, 2018
Reply

I think the best agnostics are the ones who took the time to study religious texts and really understand them. Bart Ephraim for example.

@Amisja
Ehrman?

@skado I can never spell that guy's name. I even emailed him once and got it wrong|! doh...apologies

@Amisja
No apology necessary; just wondering if that's the guy you were talking about (and he is definitely a great illustration of your point).

@skado I follow him, have read lots of his books, written to him and still get it wrong!

Write Comment
Humanist does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content read full disclaimer
  • Humanist.comis the largest non-profit community for humanists!