Miksi ei agnostisuus on parempi

ei-ateisti kirjoitti:

Ateismi on älyllistä epärehellisyyttä. Ateistit mm pyrkivät vääristelemään ateismi -käsitettä ja väittävät ajoittain ateismin tarkoittavan "uskon puutetta" jumalan olemassaoloon. "Uskonpuute" -määritelmän ongelmallisuus on siinä että sen mukaan ateisteja ovat myös agnostikot ja pikkuvauvat, sekä muut sellaiset jotka eivät halua tulla samaistetuiksi ateistien kanssa. Jopa uskossaan heikot teistit saattaisivat kuulua ateismiin. Ateismin alkuperäinen ja ainoa oikea määritelmä on se että "ateisti on henkilö joka uskoo ettei jumalaa ole olemassa". Ateistit ovat joutuneet uudelleen määrittelemään ateisminsa uskonpuutteeksi koska ovat huomanneet ettei jumalan kieltämistä kyetä perustelemaan järki-argumentein.



EINSTEIN

Jos ateismi olisi sitä mitä ateismin valhe-määritelmä väittää sen olevan, eli "ateismi on uskon puutetta jumalaan", niin silloin Einsteinin lausahduksesta "I am not an atheist" seuraa se että Einstein uskoi Jumalaan. Noh, kaikkihan tietävät että ateistien oma kotikutoinen määritelmä "ateismi on uskon puutetta" on epäaito eikä kuvaa ateistin ajatusmaailmaa. Einsteinkin tarkoitti ateistilla jumalankieltäjää.

-----------

Einstein said ("Einstein, Albert" in The Enlightened Mind, ed. Stephen Mitchell; New York: Harper Collins, 1991):

The most beautiful and profound emotion we can experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the source of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty, which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive forms -- this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religion.


George F. Will, "The Mind That Changed the World" in The Washington Post, 6 January 2005; Page A19:

[Albert] Einstein's theism, such as it was, was his faith that God does not play dice with the universe -- that there are elegant, eventually discoverable laws, not randomness, at work. Saying "I'm not an atheist," he explained:
"We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is."

In a letter to V. T. Aaltonen (7 May 1952), Einstein explained his opinion that belief in a personal God is better than atheism. Einstein said, "Mere unbelief in a personal God is no philosophy at all." [Einstein Archive 59-059]

In a letter to Hans Muehsam (30 March 1954), Einstein said: "I am a deeply religious nonbeliever... This is a somewhat new kind of religion." [Einstein Archive 38-434]

In a letter to a child who asked if scientists pray (24 January 1936), said: "Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man... In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive." [Einstein Archive 42-601]

In a letter to M. Berkowitz (25 October 1950), Einstein said: "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." [Einstein Archive 59-215]

In a letter to an Iowa student who asked, What is God? (July 1953), Einstein said, "To assume the existence of an unperceivable being... does not facilitate understanding the orderliness we find in the perceivable world." [Einstein Archive 59-085]





DARWIN

Life and Letters (Charles Darwin):

"I have never been an Atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. I think that generally (and more and more as I grow older), but not always, that an Agnostic would be the more correct description of my state of mind."

"The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an Agnostic."

"I am, also, induced to defer to a certain extent to the judgment of the many able men who have fully believed in God; but here again I see how poor an argument this is. The safest conclusion seems to me that the whole subject is beyond the scope of man's intellect; but man can do his duty."

Now, there appears to be a common misconception regarding the religious views of Charles Darwin. First of all, Darwin was never an atheist. While it is true that in his later years he was not religious to any extent, he never entirely discounted the existence of god. In his Autobiography, Darwin says he was a theist by the time he wrote "Origin of Species" and that he believed in an intelligent first cause.



AGNOSTISISM

Thomas H. Huxley, 1899

"...every man should be able to give a reason for the faith that is in him; it is the great principle of Descartes; it is the fundamental axiom of modern science. Positively the principle may be expressed: In matters of the intellect, follow your reason as far as it will take you, without regard to any other consideration. And negatively: In matters of the intellect do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable. That I take to be the agnostic faith, which if a man keep whole and undefiled, he shall not be ashamed to look the universe in the face, whatever the future may have in store for him."

kirjoitti:

Anonyymi

Kirjoita kommentti

5000

Lähetä