UCTAA churchlight

Site Search via Google

Discussion 4 to Meditation 832
Others have tacked the “unknowable” part onto the definition.

by: Clay Chesney

To add to this exchange of views (or any other,) please use the Contact form.

I haven’t been able to find any quotes from Huxley that indicate he believed we “cannot know” about the existence of God.  The definition, if there is such, of agnosticism by Huxley is generally as cited here:

Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle. Positively, the principle may be expressed as in matters of intellect, follow your reason as far as it can take you without other considerations. And negatively, in matters of the intellect, do not pretend that matters are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable. -- "Agnosticism", 1889

The last sentence is about “matters of the intellect” and he doesn’t identify the existence of God as something that is not “demonstrable”.  It is difficult to imagine how he could.  Nor does he ever make that assertion anywhere else as far as I can tell.

He reaffirms this position in the following:

That it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can provide evidence which logically justifies that certainty. This is what agnosticism asserts and in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism.-- "Agnosticism and Christianity", 1889

So, asserting that we can not know about the existence of God would require evidence which logically justifies that certainty.   Which is . . .?

It appears to me that others have tacked the “unknowable” part onto the definition of agnosticism.  It is inconsistent with the first part of the definition, which rejects the assertion of a God on the basis of logic, and would add an assertion of unknowability without a justification in logic.