by Peter Payne

Created on: May 08, 2011   Last Updated: May 09, 2011

 IS AGNOSTICISM OR ATHEISM MORE LOGICAL?

Either-or questions are seldom legitimate either-or questions. Legitimate either-or questions exclude the possibility of another choice. Is atheism defined as strict materialism, or does Zen Buddhism count as atheism since it denies the existence of an omnipotent creator-god? Since there is no conceivable evidence supporting the belief that so-called Sacred Scripture is absolute Truth, such belief requires faith that makes no pretense at rationality. There is, on the other hand, considerable evidence for materialism. So if the choice is between God as explicitly portrayed in the Bible, and materialism, then atheism is more rational. However, on the other, other hand, the evidence does not support the belief that all thought, emotion, and life itself can be accounted for by purely physical processes anywhere near as certainly as atheists insist that it does.

Atheists typically denounce those (few) of us who believe that mind is just as intrinsic to the universe as matter and energy as if we belonged in the same camp as the Intelligent Design people, and ad hominem criticism is obviously irrational. Except in a merely intellectual sense, I am not an agnostic on this issue. The evidence clearly makes highly improbable the notion that life, thought, and emotions can be explained by the operation of haphazard physical processes. However, although there are many people far more intelligent than I am who think as I do, the majority of scientists, many of whom are also more intelligent than I am, support the strict materialist interpretation of the same evidence. According to the philosopher Thomas Kuhn , how people with opposing viewpoints interpret the same evidence ultimately rests upon irrational human temperament. So if the evidence is being honestly interpreted, and not simply ignored or denied, then neither materialism nor panpsychism (for lack of a better term) can claim superior logic. Of course, both sides will typically insist that the other side is ignoring, denying, or hallucinating the evidence, but agnosticism is more logical when evidence cannot support one side over the other.

It is extraordinarily rare for people, with the sometimes exception of adolescents, to change their opinions as a consequence of purportedly logical arguments. Since most of us do not believe ourselves to be impeccable, this ought to be seen as odd. Although people who read this are probably not acquainted with my reasons for believing

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>