Program / Course 18: World Religions / Lesson 4.3
What you will learn
- Define agnosticism, and distinguish it from atheism and from indifference.
- Explain the idea of burden of proof and how it applies to claims about God.
- State the main forms of agnostic argument and the main Christian replies.
- Describe how a Christian may speak with an honest agnostic.
The big idea
Agnosticism is the view that it is not known, or cannot be known, whether God exists. The word was coined by Thomas Henry Huxley in 1869. Agnostics differ: some say the question is open and they are still looking, some say that the evidence is evenly balanced, and some say that human knowledge cannot reach the matter. The question of burden of proof asks who must give reasons first. It is a useful tool, but it does not settle the question by itself, since every position, including no position, has to be defended.
Key terms
- Agnosticism
- The view that the existence of God is unknown or unknowable. From a Greek word meaning not knowing.
- Burden of proof
- The duty of the person making a claim to give reasons for it, especially when the claim is challenged.
- Presumption
- A position taken to be true until reasons count against it. Which side deserves the presumption is often disputed.
- Epistemology
- The study of knowledge: what it is, how it is gained and what justifies belief.
- Fideism
- The view that faith does not depend on, and may be opposed to, reasoning. Some Christians hold it, and critics say it gives no answer to the agnostic.
- Pascal’s Wager
- Blaise Pascal’s argument that, since reason cannot settle whether God exists, it is prudent to live as if he does, because the possible gain is infinite.
- Apophatic theology
- The tradition of speaking of God by saying what God is not, since God exceeds human concepts. Especially strong in the Orthodox East.
Background
Huxley, a defender of Darwin, coined the word agnostic to describe his own stance: a refusal to claim knowledge beyond the evidence. He did not mean that nothing could be known, but that the claims of religion about the unseen could not be shown. Many agnostics since have described the position as one of honest uncertainty.
People use the word differently. Some say agnosticism concerns what a person knows (knowledge), and atheism concerns what a person believes (belief), so that a person could be an agnostic atheist, not believing and not claiming to know. Others use agnostic to mean a person who is undecided. Many Christians also say they have doubts, and their doubt may look like agnosticism on a bad day. A student should ask each person which meaning they intend.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: Varieties of agnosticism
A weak or empirical agnostic says that he does not know whether God exists and may find out. A strong agnostic says that no one can know, because human reason is too limited for such questions. Some are agnostic only about the details of God, not the existence of a higher power. Some are open to religious practice without belief, and some find the question unimportant, which is a different position called apatheism.
Kant’s argument is often cited: human reason is limited to the world of experience, so it cannot prove or disprove God by theory, though he thought moral reason points toward belief. Many agnostics find such limits plausible. Others find the case for ignorance overstated, since some claims about reality, such as arguments from existence, are not obviously beyond reason.
Step 2: What the burden of proof is
In a courtroom, the accused is presumed innocent, and the prosecutor must make a case. In ordinary life, a person who makes a surprising claim is expected to give reasons for it. Some atheists and agnostics hold that belief in God is a claim like this: those who assert it should supply the evidence, and in the absence of evidence the right response is to withhold belief.
Philosophers point out that the rule must be used with care. A person who denies a claim has a burden too, if the denial is itself a claim about reality. Both the person who says God exists and the person who says God does not exist make assertions. Only the agnostic who simply suspends judgment avoids a claim, and even he may be asked why suspension is reasonable.
Step 3: Christian replies about evidence and reasons
Christians reply that there are reasons for belief, such as the arguments of natural theology, the testimony of the apostles to the resurrection, the experience of believers and the moral life of the church. They hold that the presumption of the burden of proof shifts when evidence is given. Plantinga argues that belief in God can be properly basic, as belief in other minds is: held without being derived from argument, yet not irrational.
Pascal held that reason alone cannot settle the matter, and offered his Wager as a prompt to act, while also saying that the heart has reasons that reason does not know. Critics reply that the Wager is a poor argument, since it does not tell which God to follow, and that belief cannot be chosen at will. Pascal himself pressed it as a first step, urging the doubter to take up the practices of faith and to seek.
Step 4: The apophatic tradition and honest doubt
Christian tradition has its own kind of ignorance. Gregory of Nyssa and later Orthodox writers teach that God exceeds every concept, so that all human speech about him falls short. This is not agnosticism about whether God exists. It is a confession that what God is cannot be grasped, and it leads to worship and not to silence.
Scripture is also honest about doubt. The father of the sick child says, “Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief” (Mark 9:24). Thomas says he will not believe without seeing, and Jesus meets him (John 20:24-29). John the Baptist, from prison, sends to ask whether Jesus is the one (Matthew 11:2-3). These stories suggest that doubt is not itself sin. The question is what a person does with it.
Step 5: Speaking with an agnostic
A Christian who speaks with an agnostic should first learn which kind of agnostic they are talking to. The honest seeker deserves a patient hearing and suggestions for reading and practice. The agnostic who finds the question unimportant needs to hear why it matters, and cannot be argued into caring. The one who is wounded needs more care than argument.
Christian tradition also holds that faith is not only intellectual. Jesus says that anyone who is willing to do God’s will shall know whether the teaching is from God (John 7:17). A Christian may therefore invite an agnostic to pray, to read the Gospels, to visit a church, and to continue to ask the questions.
- Do I know what I mean when I say that I do not know?
- Who should carry the burden of proof for a claim about God, and why?
- Is suspending judgment a neutral position, or is it a choice with consequences?
- What evidence would be enough for me to say that God exists, or does not?
- How is the doubt of Thomas different from a settled refusal to believe?
- What would it mean to look for God honestly, and would I be willing?
Examples
A weak agnostic
A college student says she was raised in a church and no longer feels sure. She says that she does not know if there is a God and that she is willing to look at the question. She reads a Gospel and speaks to a chaplain. Her agnosticism is a place of inquiry.
A strong agnostic
A scientist says that no argument for or against God is decisive, and that anyone who claims to know is claiming too much. He does not attend church and does not think of himself as an atheist. He holds that the question is beyond human reach. A Christian can ask which arguments he has examined and why they fail.
Pascal’s reasoning in practice
A man who cannot yet believe starts attending services, praying and reading Scripture, on the ground that he has nothing to lose by trying and may gain a great deal. Pascal advised something like this. A friend warns that he may be going through the motions. Both are partly right, and only time tells.
Different perspectives
Agnostic
Agnostics commonly say that intellectual honesty requires proportioning belief to evidence, and that claims of certainty on either side go beyond what can be known. Many have respect for religion and for its moral teaching, and some join religious communities for the sake of belonging.
Catholic
The Catholic Church teaches that God can be known with certainty by natural reason (Dei Filius), so it rejects the claim that the question is beyond human reach. It also holds that faith is a gift and a free act, and that the Church should treat the sincere seeker with respect (Catechism 2125-2127).
Orthodox
Orthodox theology teaches that God is unknowable in his essence yet known in his energies, so that a form of unknowing belongs to faith itself. Orthodox writers invite the doubter into worship and prayer as the way to knowledge, since in the Orthodox view theology is first lived.
Protestant
Protestants disagree. Evidentialists offer arguments to the agnostic. Reformed thinkers hold that knowledge of God is given by the Spirit and that doubt is not removed by argument alone. Kierkegaard, a Lutheran, taught that faith involves a leap that argument cannot make.
Scholarly
Philosophers dispute where the burden of proof lies, and the dispute is not settled. Some argue that each person must assess the total evidence, and that a rule about burden does little. Others hold that a presumption of naturalism is a reasonable starting point, and theists dispute this.
Why it matters
Many people are not settled atheists or confident believers. They are agnostic, whether by temperament or because of the claims of different religions. A Christian who knows the shape of agnosticism can offer something better than a debate: honest conversation, a clear account of reasons and an invitation to look.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: Agnostics are people who are too lazy to decide.
Correction: Many agnostics have studied the arguments carefully and conclude that they are not decisive. Some are anxious seekers. The charge of laziness is unfair.
Misunderstanding: Agnosticism is a safe middle position that needs no defense.
Correction: It also makes claims, such as that the evidence is balanced or that the matter is unknowable. These claims need reasons too, and the choice not to act on religion has consequences.
Misunderstanding: Doubt means you have lost faith.
Correction: Scripture records doubt and the Church has always had doubters among its saints. Doubt can lead to deeper faith or away from it, depending on what is done with it.
Misunderstanding: Pascal’s Wager is meant to prove God exists.
Correction: It is a practical argument aimed at people who cannot be persuaded by proofs, urging them to act. Pascal did not offer it as a proof.
Knowledge check
Who coined the word agnostic and what did he mean by it?
Thomas Henry Huxley coined it in 1869. He meant that a person should not claim to know what cannot be shown by evidence, and he applied it to the claims of religion about the unseen. He did not mean that nothing can be known. The word comes from Greek, meaning not knowing.
What is the burden of proof, and why is it hard to apply to the question of God?
It is the duty of the one making a claim to give reasons for it. It is hard to apply because both the person who says God exists and the one who denies it make claims. Which side carries the burden depends on which view is taken as the default, and that is disputed.
What is the point of Pascal’s Wager?
It is an argument for people who cannot be moved by proofs. Pascal argued that if there is a chance God exists, the possible gain of belief is infinite and the cost is small, so it is wise to live as if God exists and take up the practices of faith. It is meant to prompt action, not to prove God.
How does Scripture treat doubt?
Scripture records honest doubt without condemning it: the father who prays for help with his unbelief, Thomas who asks to see, and John the Baptist who asks whether Jesus is the one. Each is met with patience. The text suggests that doubt matters for what it leads a person to do.
Think it through
- What questions about God do you find most difficult, and have you let yourself ask them?
- How would you speak to a friend who says she is not sure, and does not want to be argued with?
- What do you make of the proposal to try the practices of faith before being sure?
- Is it possible to be too sure, on either side?
Independent assignment
An agnostic’s case and a reply
In your notebook, write about 250 words stating the agnostic position as an honest agnostic would, including why the evidence seems balanced or the matter unknowable. Then write about 250 words in reply, from a Christian perspective, that begins with respect and gives reasons. Add 100 words on what you would say to an agnostic friend in a conversation, in your own words, in the form of questions and not statements.
Further study
- Blaise Pascal, Pensées Read selectively for the Wager and the remarks on the heart and reason.
- Alvin Plantinga, Warranted Christian Belief Read selectively for the argument that belief in God can be properly basic.
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Hiddenness of God Read for the argument that a loving God would not leave honest seekers in doubt, and the replies.
- C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity Read the opening chapters on the moral law as an argument that starts from common ground.
- Mark 9:24 Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.
- John 20:27 Jesus meets the doubt of Thomas.
- John 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine.
- Jeremiah 29:13 Ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart.