Agnosticism
Agnosticism as the denial of knowledge beyond phenomena; its relationship to Kantian criticism and its philosophical refutation.
Agnosticism limits the field of certitude, declaring that beyond a restricted domain knowledge is unavailable. Subjectivism (Taine): only conscious states are certain — refuted because awareness of outer-seeming states already extends certitude beyond pure subjectivity, and because the doctrine collapses into universal scepticism. Positivism (Comte, Spencer): only sense-data are certain — self-refuting, since the proposition 'only sense-data are certain' is not a sense-datum but an intellectual claim, and because science presupposes causal relations that no sense perceives. Both forms destroy science by excluding knowledge of causes, and both are self-contradictory: they propose as certainly true that only a limited field is certain. The fundamental error is conflating 'known only through sense-data' with 'limited to sense-data in its content'.
a) meaning of agnosticism Agnosticism is derived from the Greek word agnostikos, which means, “not knowing, ignorant.”
The term is used in theology and in philosophy. In theology, it indicates the doctrine formulated by Thomas Huxley (1825-1895) to distinguish his position that God is unknowable from that of the Atheists that God is non-existent. In philosophy, Agnosticism is the doctrine of those who limit the field of certitude in one way or another, and declare that outside the assigned limits there is no certitude to be had. Of the intellectual outland, man must be content to remain in ignorance.
Agnostics are not agreed upon the exact location of the field of certitude. Some say that we have certainty only of consciousness, that is, of our own subEXISTENCE OF CERTITUDE 175 jective states. These are called Subjectivists and their type of Agnosticism is known as Subjectivism. Other Agnostics contend that we can have certitude of positive sense-findings and of nothing else. These are called Positivists (and sometimes Sensists) and their doctrine, Positivism. Hippolyte Taine (1828-1893), French critic and historian, who furthered the agnostic doctrines of Auguste Comte (1798-1837), declares for Subjectivism, and holds that outside of consciousness nothing has real existence. Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) declares for Positivism when he states that we must limit certitude to the field of sense-findings, even though there is an absolute Being outside the range of sense (“The Unknowable”), in which we must believe. Comte was the most notable Agnostic, with Spencer as a close second. Important names associated with Positivism are: Thomas Huxley (1825-1895) ; John Tyndall (1820-1893) ; Emil Durkheim (1858-1917).
Criticism of Agnosticism
- Subjectivism.—If there is evidence for the existence of trans-subjective reality, it is unscientific to limit the field of certitude to subjective states. But there is evidence for the existence of trans-subjective reality, as we have seen in our studies of Evidence and of Dogmatism. Therefore, we reject Subjectivism as unscientific.—Again, Subjectivism holds that nothing is reliable but states of consciousness. What of those states of consciousness by which we are aware of outer reality? In how far are these reliable?
If they are reliable, inasmuch as we may be certain of what they represent, then Subjectivism is done for, and the field of certitude is extended to outer or trans-subjective reality. If they are reliable merely in the sense that we are aware that such states exist in us, then Subjectivism is neither more nor less than Universal Skepticism, and is to be rejected as such.
In any case, Subjectivism is inadmissible. 2. Positivism.—If there is evidence for the existence of reality in the supra-sensible order, it is unscientific to limit the field of certitude to the positive data of sense. But there is such evidence, as we have seen in our studies of self-evident truths. The primary truths themselves are supra-sensible, inasmuch as they are intellectual principles which find concrete illustration and exemplification in sensible reality and in the “squaring” of knowledge with sensible fact. Positivism contradicts itself, for its essential expression, “Only sense data are to be trusted,” is itself something proposed to be understood and not sensed. Hence, Positivism is inadmissible.
We cannot admit as true any theory which upsets all science. Agnosticism, whether subjectivistic or positivistic, does precisely that. For science is ever a quest of causes, and an explaining of effects in the light of known causes. But Agnosticism denies the possibility of knowing causality, for causality is neither the object of a purely subjective consciousness, nor is it the object of any sense.
For these reasons we reject Agnosticism as a wholly inadequate and fallacious theory of knowledge.
Summary Of The Article
Our brief study of Agnosticism included a definition of the name and an explanation of its use in philosophy. We have found Agnosticism divided into two main forms, Positivism and Subjectivism. A critical investigation of each of these has shown us their unscientific character.