“I am an agnostic; I do not pretend to know what many ignorant men are sure of.” -Clarence DarrowI am excited to return to writing on this blog after a protracted absence. It has been a very busy summer so far (they always seem to be busier than you expect), and I have been attempting to catch up on some much needed rest. I plan to continue this blog, but for the remainder of the summer I will likely post at most once every two weeks. When the school year begins in August, I will likely revert to my weekly schedule. Thank you for your patience in this matter.
What I wish to discuss today is a trend which has slowly gained momentum over the past several decades. This is a movement in what I would call "fashionable thought," that is, the conceptions held by society's prominent thinkers, which harmonizes well with current philosophical and cultural trends. Essentially this is a very popular line of thinking which is lauded by the general public and sees very little resistance from outside forces. Now, fashionable thought is not always wrong, nor is it necessarily always a negative force, but I suspect that more often than not these philosophical trends lead to a dangerous place.
Such is the case, I believe, with the modern prevalence of agnosticism in Western culture. It has become very common for people in the public eye to say things like "I like to think that there is a God, but I don't feel like I can say for certain that one version or another is correct." Several prominent humanists have chosen the label "agnostic" over "atheist" because they are willing to admit the possibility of a God, citing the lack of evidence for either side. While I certainly understand the superficial intellectual attraction of agnosticism, I find this general trend to be more or less disconcerting. Allow me to explain why.
If You Think Just a Little Longer...
Let me get this out of the way first: I am not attacking all agnostics. I have several friends who subscribe to this philosophy and have arrived at it through honest circumspection and consideration, and they have been completely respectful of me and my beliefs. Yet there are many agnostics who have become emboldened with a false sense of intellectual superiority. This is partly due to reinforcement by modern cultural mores which stress above all else acceptance of all people, no matter their philosophy. And while this ideal is not misguided, people have become misguided while attempting to live it out.
For all of its faults, agnosticism in its pure form does one thing well: it avoids offending people. It is a middle-of-the-road, simplistic answer to the questions every philosopher is asking, and it requires very little pondering to comprehend. I do not say this to belittle it—many times in life the simplest answers can be the best. But it has become more and more common for agnostics to consider their philosophical stance as the truly "enlightened" one; the place at which all sincere philosophers will arrive, given enough time.
Therefore, honest people of faith such as myself have found ourselves to be the subjects of jokes made by certain smug agnostics, who see us as archaic thinkers who either haven't meditated on the mysteries of the universe enough to arrive at their ultimate philosophy or are too closed-minded to ever get there. We are the simpletons trapped in a pre-scientific culture who deny evidence and attempt to coerce others into our brainwashed masses (yeah, I've been told all this). And what's more, we even have the audacity to claim that our way of thinking is correct, and that others (including the amicable agnostics) might be incorrect and face consequences for their way of thinking. We are even willing to offend people for the sake of our beliefs!
Face the Music
But is agnosticism really an intellectually or philosophically superior stance? I mean, it certainly has some appeal, especially in our modern cosmopolitan society. Nevertheless, it behooves us to examine this appeal to see if it is based on solid reasoning. If so, I would have to give this philosophical stance at least some consideration. Trust me, I definitely don't always find it easy to be a Christian.
Alas, I have not been able to come to this conclusion about agnosticism. For all the contemplation I afford it, I cannot consider it a philosophically tenable position. Allow me to explain. My faith as a Christian is not purely theoretical, it is also very practical. What Christianity does is it gives me a well-defined answer to questions such as "Why are we here?" and "Is there a God?"
Agnosticism, as you well know, chooses to ignore these questions and their implications altogether. It is the land of the blissfully ignorant, wherein important questions like this don't have to bother us with their implications for our lives. By shutting our eyes, we feel we are no longer responsible for answering the question "What do you see?"
Not the SAT
As you may know, the SAT (Scholastic Assessment Test) is a test which purports to quantify a high school student's readiness for collegiate study. The test has a scoring method which can confuse many students at first, because it is unlike most other examinations. That is, points are subtracted on the SAT for incorrect answers. Instead of simply failing to receive the point for a correct answer, students are deducted one quarter of a point for each wrong answer given. Therefore, students are encouraged to leave blank the questions about which they are unsure.
This same mindset is what drives agnosticism forward. Since many of the questions faith systems attempt to answer are unclear and uncomfortable, the agnostic mindset seeks to avoid the penalty for not having a correct answer by not answering the question at all. And this sounds nice in theory. However, when you think about it, most of these questions can't be left blank.
Allow me to explain. I believe the most common question which drives a person to agnosticism is "Is there a God?" There really is no "concrete" evidence one way or another on which to base an answer, so it seems reasonable to say, "Well, I don't really know, so I'm just going to ignore it and get on with my life." But, according to almost all of the current answers to the question, this answer is tantamount to choosing atheism. At least in the Judeo-Christian tradition, ignoring God is the same as choosing against Him.
Let me illustrate this with an example. Imagine that you are in a vehicle which has veered off the road and is currently barreling toward a large tree. Several options run through your head as to what you can do to avoid the tree. You could turn the steering wheel to the right or left, you could slam on the breaks or pull the emergency break to try and slow down the vehicle in time. Certain other less practical options also present themselves: why don't you throw the door open and bail out, or speed up to see if you can uproot the tree with more force? Still another voice in your head tells you, "It's too late to avoid hitting the tree; just give up and prepare for the end." Now, it is very likely that one or more of the options for avoiding the tree will not work. In fact, the voice in your head might be right: perhaps it is too late to change your fate. Under the pressure of the moment and the lack of foreknowledge, you determine that you can't make up your mind, and you decide to ignore the issue altogether. Do you see? This has the exact same outcome as if you had agreed with the voice in your head and done nothing!
It is the same with the reality of God. No matter how many people decide to ignore the issue, this is not a question without an answer. Eventually each of us is going to have to stare the answer to this question in the face, and if anyone but the atheists are correct, your decision (or lack thereof) will have consequences. There is no leaving the answer blank. To refuse to answer is to answer. There is no getting out of it.
I implore you, do not follow so many celebrities into an acquiescent hell. Look at what each side has to say and what each side has to offer, and make up your mind, instead of letting it be made for you. And furthermore, once you decide what you are going to believe, let that belief affect the way you live. Actions are symptomatic of a person's true beliefs. Agnosticism is is an okay philosophical standpoint, but only as a stepping stone to real, concrete belief. Do not let it be your destination.
Galatians 6:7-10- "Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life. And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart. Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith."
