Ignosticism and theological non-cognitivism. Reading material help.

[Zarf]

I would consider myself an Ignostic. The problem I am having at the moment is finding reading material in this area, hopefully there are a few of you out there that can help.

For those interested in Ignosticism take a look at this page.

With reference to that page I have tried to find some of the sources mentioned by InformedIgnorance and struggled just as much as he did apparently. I have tried to get a hold of Theodore M. Drange's paper 'Is "God exists" Cognitive?' without luck. I know it is displayed here. But I do not have access to this journal, nor is that journal available any longer on that site. If anyone is able to provide me with this paper I would be impressed, and also grateful.

I recently purchased 'Ignosticism: A Philosophical Justification for Atheism' by Tristan Vick, hopefully this will be an enjoyable read and something worth referencing.


As you can see I'm struggling for material. Has anyone got any relevant recommendations? I know this area is incredibly under-discussed and so obviously articles and books are hard to come by.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

To be honest I'm surprised there is one entire book on Ignosticism It can be described in a sentence.

 

[Zarf]

To be honest I'm surprised there is one entire book on Ignosticism It can be described in a sentence.

I was also quite surprised. Although I did expect more articles to have been written on the subject. I think there is a lengthy discussion to be had in the area of Ignosticism, if his book delves into Philosophy of language which I think it does then it could make for a very interesting read. Other than that I've only managed to find people hinting of Ignosticism such as A. J. Ayer and Sam Harris.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I believe that the term was coined by Rabbi Wine (z"l). My sense from my very few contacts with him is that he never made a big deal of it.

 

[Zarf]

I believe that the term was coined by Rabbi Wine (z"l). My sense from my very few contacts with him is that he never made a big deal of it.

Yeah it would definitely seem that way as I can't find anything he wrote about it. Nonetheless I wish to find more material.

I'll check my university library for Drange's articles next week but the Journal they were published in does not seem to be available online so I doubt the library will house them.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I haven't thought about Drange since I use to post at iidb. I rather liked the guy.

 

[Sha'irullah]

What is there to even talk about. I have always regarded my lack of belief int he existence of gods as ignostic. Ignosticism can be rather amazing to some extent I admit but at the same time it is practice by so many people.

I can do very religious things for examples. I actively worship gods but because of my ignosticism I don't regard them as real or existent int he slightest bit. Ignosticism is sort of like apatheism but unlike apatheism the person usually holds a regard for god(s).
Ignosticism is sort of in this grey area and atheist and theists will hate it. Considering this age where they clash over everything, ignosticism won't be mentioned because it is a compromise.
Ignosticism is to gods what bisexuality is to sexuality. Nobody wants a compromise when both parties want to diminish the other.

 

[Zarf]

What is there to even talk about. I have always regarded my lack of belief int he existence of gods as ignostic. Ignosticism can be rather amazing to some extent I admit but at the same time it is practice by so many people.

I can do very religious things for examples. I actively worship gods but because of my ignosticism I don't regard them as real or existent int he slightest bit. Ignosticism is sort of like apatheism but unlike apatheism the person usually holds a regard for god(s).
Ignosticism is sort of in this grey area and atheist and theists will hate it. Considering this age where they clash over everything, ignosticism won't be mentioned because it is a compromise.
Ignosticism is to gods what bisexuality is to sexuality. Nobody wants a compromise when both parties want to diminish the other.

I think there is a lot to discuss in regards to Ignosticism. When an Ignostic is presented with a definition of 'God' one may accept the referent of said definition as existing, the criteria by which that is done I think varies significantly between Ignostics. I think even if an Ignostic accepts the other persons definition of 'God' as existing, they accept it as that persons definition of 'God', a sort of de dicto definition of God and not a de re definition of 'God'. I don't really see Ignosticism as a compromise between atheism and theism, I see it as preceding them. Although I do see what you mean and in some sense it could be seen as a compromise. The variation between Ignostics in what they would be willing to accept as a valid definition of 'God' will depend on whether or not the individual can justifiably believe in this definition.

Surely these things talked about thus far are worth further analysis and deliberation.