- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
There are two positions of doubt: agnosticism and skepticism. The difference is that agnosticism is used to denote a position regarding religion and God. The theist believes in God. An atheist doesn't believe in God. The agnostic believes that there is no specific information on this issue, so his attitude can be described by the word “uncertainty”. Skepticism, on the other hand, is a position where the agent of knowledge tries to doubt everything.
We cannot prove the existence of God, nor can we prove his absence. This is the agnostic position. “A” is a negation particle. Gnosis – knowledge, cognition. That is, agnostics argue that the presence of God in the conventional sense is unprovable. Although science has evidently rejected all dogmas of any religion.
Unlike skepticism, agnosticism is not a position of doubt. As an example, I will cite the famous agnostic saying of Socrates: “I know that I know nothing.” Where is the doubt? Agnosticism is a position of negative affirmation. From a skeptical point of view, I would call this position obstructionist. The lie of agnosticism lies in the fact that all its statements fall under the liar's paradox: indeed, if Socrates knows nothing, how can he know what he claims? Unlike agnosticism, skepticism is constructive doubt: it does not deny or accept anything, because it does not have sufficient grounds for this. But skepticism does not claim that it can never have such grounds. This word is not in the arsenal of skepticism – only in agnosticism.