After reading an article a little while ago about an Agnostic-Humanist married to a Roman-Catholic I got to thinking "What is an Agnostic-Humanist?"
Now recently I have been referring to myself as an Agnostic but I was not entirely sure of what the definition of one was. I just assumed I did (and I was mostly right as it turned out). And I could assume what a Humanist was (but I was pretty wrong on that one). So I wondered, what am I really? Well after some research it turns out that there is a variety of Agnostics (of course) and I am in essence what is called a Strong Agnostic which believes "that it is impossible for humans to know whether or not any deities exist." This strengthens my belief that I have always viewed Agnosticism as the great indecisive category, the maybe-maybe not of the religious world. I have always felt that people are entitled to their own beliefs but any of that stuff always falls short for me. I believe what i can see and test. Anything outside of that I can't prove it doesn't exist so I leave it open for interpretation.
But I am also a Humanist it seems. Humanism is the belief in morals and other such stuff that religion can teach you just without the religion. I for one have always been in the camp that you don't need religion to be a good person (i.e. not all atheists are bad). Morals and ethics stem from a belief in good and bad, something that is in human nature, not a book (i.e. killing is bad, obviously, you don't need divine inspiration to figure that out).
So in essence I am a: Strong Agnostic Humanist.
2 comments:
I'm in pretty much the same camp. I could be wrong, but I see Humanism as a belief in doing good for human kind, your fellow man (and woman). There is a magazine on Humanism out there (don't know the title)..I know Kurt Vonnegut was a Humanist.
I have seen both views of Humanism. If you are correct then I am not a Humanist because really, I don't care about humanity. They can wallow in the cesspool pit that they made for themselves.
Post a Comment