Reading agnostic literature

[gnostic]

If you are into agnosticism, would you read Huxley's essays or other agnostic authors' writings on agnosticism?

Would you consider it a requirement to read such literature to be a "real" agnostic?

I'm just curious of how many agnostics would read agnostic literature.

 

[ikitikitembo]

If you are into agnosticism, would you read Huxley's essays or other agnostic authors' writings on agnosticism?

Would you consider it a requirement to read such literature to be a "real" agnostic?

I'm just curious of how many agnostics would read agnostic literature.

I definately would, and plan to.

Why would it be required to read a book in order to believe what you believe (or in this case lack belief)? Definately not.

 

[lamplighter]

I've read one of Huxleys essays before and plan on reading more. But the only requirement to be Agnostic is to be one, actually I was Agnostic before I could put a title to my belief. Then one day I was browsing through the dictionary and saw the definition, then BAM! it hit me like a ton of bibles.

 

[Yerda]

Would you consider it a requirement to read such literature to be a "real" agnostic?

Nope. It would likely be useful though.

I'm just curious of how many agnostics would read agnostic literature.

I'll read anything. I've read about Huxley and a few short pieces regarding agnosticism. I've also read some Robert Green Ingersoll essays, although only one on agnosticism. Lately I read a few articles about Ignosticism - which lead me to Jewish humanism which I also found quite interesting. I'm easily interested, me.

 

[gnostic]

But the only requirement to be Agnostic is to be one, actually I was Agnostic before I could put a title to my belief.

It was actually the same for me too. I didn't know what I belonged to. It wasn't until 6 or so years ago when I discover the term "agnostic", when I realised that this sums up where I belonged to in term of theism.

I'll read anything. I've read about Huxley and a few short pieces regarding agnosticism.

I know only about the outline of Huxley's life, particularly on how tried to distance science from theology in science classes, and read some quotes from his view on what is agnosticism. But I didn't read his whole essay on the subject.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I definately would, and plan to.

Classic.

 

[TumH20Coreybear]

For me agnosticism is the only way to keep an open mind in the idea of god(s).

So, no, I won't read those essays, and no I don't think it should be required, lol...

cause it isn't like this is a club or anything.

and it definetly isn't a religion...

I mean who would we worship?

lol...

everything and nothing at the same time? lol....

yeah...

MONKEY

SARU SHI MASU!!!

 

[purplehaze]

If you are into agnosticism, would you read Huxley's essays or other agnostic authors' writings on agnosticism?

Would you consider it a requirement to read such literature to be a "real" agnostic?

I'm just curious of how many agnostics would read agnostic literature.

Does an agnostic disbelieve in God?

If so, then he/she is an atheist also.

I guess you can say I'm an agnostic as well as an atheist. I don't believe in the existence of any Gods or anything supernatural. Therefore, I'm an atheist. I don't have any knowledge of a God or gods and pretty much anything supernatural, therefore, I'm agnostic also.

But to answer your question, yes I do read essays by some well known agnostics, Robert Ingersoll and Clarence Darrow just to name a few. And I love their writings. I've read some stuff by Thomas Huxley too. Great stuff. I have a feeling he coined the term agnostic as a joke though. But I could be wrong. :snoopy:

 

[Willamena]

If you are into agnosticism, would you read Huxley's essays or other agnostic authors' writings on agnosticism?

Would you consider it a requirement to read such literature to be a "real" agnostic?

I'm just curious of how many agnostics would read agnostic literature.

I haven't read Huxley, no, but then I consider agnosticism to have been what David Hume practiced with his philosophy more than 100 years before Huxley coined the term.

I don't think it's necessary to read Huxley to be agnostic, no.

 

[gnostic]

I haven't read Huxley, no, but then I consider agnosticism to have been what David Hume practiced with his philosophy more than 100 years before Huxley coined the term.

I have not read any of Hume's works too. I just know a little bit outline of his life.

Great stuff. I have a feeling he coined the term agnostic as a joke though. But I could be wrong.

Yeah. I got the same feeling too. I think he was trying to be witty among his fellow intellectuals.

 

[A. Leaf]

I haven't read Huxley, no, but then I consider agnosticism to have been what David Hume practiced with his philosophy more than 100 years before Huxley coined the term.

I don't think it's necessary to read Huxley to be agnostic, no.

You know that individual your in love with, is it R.Dawkins????

Please don't forget in your evaluation of the conception of quantum physics into God's creation not to forget, when somethin dies for it does not, as you have mentioned the physical turns to Ash, as all the knowledge becomes a form of Energy, I can prove it to you be we would have to be one to one and its purely visual. Up 4 it????

 

[Aasimar]

Though it would be considered more atheist than agnostic, I would highly recommend reading Bertrand Russel's "Why I am Not a Christian." Good stuff, that book. And written in the early 1900's.

 

[cottage]

I haven't read Huxley, no, but then I consider agnosticism to have been what David Hume practiced with his philosophy more than 100 years before Huxley coined the term.

I don't think it's necessary to read Huxley to be agnostic, no.

From my extensive reading of Hume I'm sure his position was that which dare not speak its name; the era he lived in made it impossible to admit his atheism, and he periodically paid lip service to existence of a Supreme Being, even condemning atheism. The Dialogues, though, were composed of some of the most formidable and scathing attacks on the rationality and belief in God. Friends advised Hume not to publish and he arranged for pothumous publication when he was near death from bowel cancer.

Philo in the Dialogues is believed to represent Hume's real views

'It is certain from experience that the smallest grain of natural honesty and benevolence has more effect on men's conduct than the most pompous views suggested by theological theories and systems. A man's natural inclination works incessantly upon him ... Whereas religious motives ... operate only by starts and bounds.

Hume (Enquiries) also attacked Descartes' arguments in the Meditations, and argued for the material world as the Necessary Being. He was almost certainly anti-religion.

 

[Trantorfuzz]

I have not read any of Hume's works too. I just know a little bit outline of his life.

Yeah. I got the same feeling too. I think he was trying to be witty among his fellow intellectuals.

I have read Hume's "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion" and recommend it strongly. I have also read the essay in which Huxley introduces the term "agnosticism." I have never heard anyone else suggest that it was a joke before and did not get the "joke" when I was reading it.

 

[Skwim]

Though it would be considered more atheist than agnostic, I would highly recommend reading Bertrand Russel's "Why I am Not a Christian." Good stuff, that book. And written in the early 1900's.

The very book that confirmed my opinion that Christianity is bunk. Written as an essay in 1927.

As for going out of my way to read agnostic literature, I have no desire.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

If you are into agnosticism, would you read Huxley's essays or other agnostic authors' writings on agnosticism?

I have, but not because he coined the phrase or anything.

Would you consider it a requirement to read such literature to be a "real" agnostic?

I would find it hard to classify literature as being agnostic. It was easier for Huxley- he was pressured into adopting a label. But how much can you right about the position "I don't know"?

 

[Joshua Pryce]

Would you consider it a requirement to read such literature to be a "real" agnostic?

My understanding is that true agnosticism is not practice but theory. Practice defines a believer from someone who does not believe.