Atheist are not Agnostics are not Necessarily Philosophers

[wolven7]

I'm sending this in to NPR, in response to this article. The letter won't get on the air (it's too long), but, for any number of reasons, I felt myself needing to say something.

--------------------

In listening to Barbara Bradley Hagerty's piece on Camp Inquiry, I was increasingly dismayed at the lack of distinction between the terms "atheist" and "agnostic." The terms are increasingly muddled, in today's conversations on science and belief, and even a brief mention of their differences would have done a world of good.

Too often agnostics are cast as "atheist-lite," only waiting for the final disproving factor to give up any inquiry into the various possibilities of universal generation. Rather, Agnosticism is the most honest form of skepticism; it is clearly and firmly saying "I Don't Know," and, as Socrates said, this starting place is often the best, because everything is open, from there.

Finally, on the implicit equating of philosophy with denial of faith, I can only say that I hope young Ryan Lee continues in honest reading and inquiry, from Dawkins to Aquinas to Ayer to Hume, and many many more.

We can always use more scholars in both Philosophy and Religious Studies.

Comments

[necrophonic.livejournal.com]

I agree that saying agnosticism is "atheism-lite" is kinda BS. I think it's just sort of media spin, like everything else that has to do with these subjects.

But, on a completely irrelevant note, your sentence "...only waiting for the final disproving factor to give up any inquiry into the various possibilities of universal generation."

In the most ridiculously over-simplified way, that IS sort of what agnosticism is, because if you DID have proof, you WOULD know, so you WOULD no longer be open to the other possibility, because you'd KNOW it was wrong.

Granted, we can't really "KNOW" anything, so my above point, like I said, is completely irrelevant, but if it WERE possible to know with absolute certainty, as soon as you did, you wouldn't be agnostic anymore.

But that's such a stoner-esque reasoning I kind of chuckle to myself that I thought of it whilst sober. I feel like I should go "yeah, man... it's like, if you could see BOTH sides of the door, you'd KNOW what the door LOOKED like from BOTH SIIIDES!!!"

And Socrates is keen.

The thing that actually annoyed me about the article was this:

"But what about the afterlife? Are these kids comfortable with the idea that when people die, that's it?"

That pisses me off to no end... Asking are the kids COMFORTABLE with the idea? Like truth is based on how comfortable it makes you. Like "but are these kids COMFORTABLE with gravity? And should we be able to FORCE that idea on them if they're not COMFORTABLE with it?"

What kind of bullshit is that? That's the kind of air-headed journalism that makes my plasma percolate.

The fact that the question even comes up just pisses me the fuck off. You don't walk into a fucking church and say "what do you believe is the true nature of the universe?" "Oh, I believe God created it in 7 days." "Well, are you COMFORTABLE with the idea there's someone around with that much power?"

Like the person can DO something about that? Like they can just go "oh, gee, you're right, that makes me uncomfortable. I'll become an atheist, because my entire belief system, all the things I believe are true can be dropped and forgotten based on what I feel is comfortable for me."

I don't think the existence of fluorescent lighting makes me comfortable. Knowing that they truly exist will be stricken from my fucking brain now, because I don't want to live in a world like that. I'll simply FORGET that they do, and never believe anybody when they tell me otherwise, because all the things I hold true are completely plastic and fluid and can be changed at will, on a complete fucking whim, because I'm not comfortable with them.

Fucking jackasses.

[wolven.livejournal.com]

Like the person can DO something about that?

I LOVE that line. That's basically perfect. IF it is the case, THEN it is the case. Raising the comfort question seems intrinsically designed to make me go... "Well... No. But what the fuck can I do about it? And NOW I'm depressed and feeling impotent. Thanks."