“Myself when young did eagerly frequent Doctor and Saint, and heard great argument About it and about: but evermore Came out by the same Door as in I went.”

With them the Seed of Wisdom did I sow, And with my own hand labour’d it to grow: And this was all the Harvest that I reap’d – I came like Water and like Wind I go.”

-The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, as rendered by Edward FitzGerald

My father and mother came from Southern Baptist traditions. Both, however, were religious liberals, and family religious activities were sporadic and low keyed. Sunday school was on and off during elementary school years, and did sometimes include the Jesus story. I heard dramatic accounts of the Jesus story from some of my mother’s relatives who were fundamentalists. The story was confusing to me during those years.

When I was fourteen years old my family was involved in a Lutheran church. This was largely motivated by social relationships, which included an active teen group that I enjoyed. Shortly after turning fifteen it was suggested that I enroll in a confirmation class at the church. I was not very enthusiastic initially, but there were a couple of girls in the class who inspired my interest. As it turned out, that class proved to be one of the most important events in my life. It was the first time for engaging in any serious or systematic study of religion.

Early on in the class skepticism arose concerning Jesus and the miracles. Next, and more serious, came concern about what seemed to be one of the basic principles of Christianity: If you believed in Jesus as a potential savior for humankind, and as your personal savior, you went to everlasting Heaven after death. If not, you went to the everlasting torments of Hell! One thing this certainly meant was that most of the people in the world were destined for Hell. That just didn’t make sense. And it didn’t make sense that a Supreme Being who had set all of this business up had arranged it that way. Well, at that point one thing was clear. I was not a Christian. But, the most important thing to come from that confirmation class was yet to come.

That class was the first time for giving serious thought to religious, theological, or metaphysical matters. It stimulated a number of questions. One afternoon after school I had a profound experience. A question came to mind. How can there be Anything? Any world? Any existence? What I now refer to as the mystery of existence. The question was overwhelming. I couldn’t seem to let go of it and pondered it for a few weeks. One thought was that it seemed to make more sense that there would not be any existence. People considered to be wise were consulted, but when they thought about this seriously they seemed to be as perplexed as I was. I “Came out by the same Door as in I went.” The answer for me was finally “I don’t know.” While not knowing the term at the time, I in effect had become an agnostic. The term was learned two years later upon discovering that my favorite uncle was an agnostic. However, at the same time, in some enigmatic way I began to see my life as being on a spiritual path.

A result of that confirmation class has been a fascination with, and enjoyment of, contemplating the “Big Questions.”

The Mystery of Existence and Is There a God?

The mystery of existence is the greatest of all mysteries and the most basic of the big questions. It is mainly what has kept me an agnostic rather than an atheist. (It should be acknowledged that regarding Abrahamic concepts of God I’m more of an atheist.) The immensity of the universe (or a multiverse cosmos) is incredible; impossible to fathom. Thinking about this sometimes makes me wonder if perhaps almost anything might be possible. However, it doesn’t make me a believer. I‘m in agreement with physicist Richard Feynman who once said in an interview: “I can live with doubt and uncertainty. I think it’s much more interesting to live NOT knowing than to have answers which might be wrong.” I truly don’t know how there happens to be any existence.

Concerning ideas about God, it seems most likely that the Abrahamic type God(s) was created by humans. Indications of this go back as far as Pre-Hindu Vedic scriptures and ancient Greek philosophy. There is a viewpoint that There Must be Something Running the Show. Something more fundamental than the laws of nature. That does seem to make sense. But what that something might be is certainly a big question, unless one willing to accept simplistic ready-made answers. For those of us who are freethinkers it’s a matter to be pondered deeply. There is an encouraging current trend in Western Civilization. We are seeing increasingly a move from the traditional all-powerful, all-knowing conscious, intelligent Being to more abstract, tentative, and flexible conceptualizations of God. In part this seems to be influenced by Eastern religion and philosophy.

Is There Any Inherent Purpose or Meaning to Existence?

For me, this is the second greatest mystery. Most people want some fundamental, inherent purpose and meaning to existence and life. Is there any? I don’t know. The evidence we have indicates that we live in an indifferent and impersonal universe. Thus far, I have to go with the secular humanist and existentialist view that we have to devise our own purpose and meaning. Many of those who espouse this view hold that it is sufficient. Frankly, I find that very difficult to accept. Considering all of the terrible tragedies of life the view that there is no basic, inherent purpose or meaning can be heartbreaking. Some existentialists have a view that human life is an absurdity. While not subscribing to that position, the rationale for it is understandable.

Another statement by Richard Feynman is pertinent: “I don’t feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without any purpose.” Well, I don’t feel frightened either. But I don’t feel good about the “universe without any purpose.” A major purpose I have devised for myself is that of contemplating these kinds of questions.

The Nature of Reality

Related to the existence question is whether we humans are capable of understanding the essential nature of reality. A cursory look at this matter invites a disdain for the question. We experience it every day through our five senses. But wait. Why have some of our best minds - philosophers, theologians, and scientists- been struggling with this question for centuries? There are some serious issues here which have divided major world religions and that modern mainstream science has been dealing with for at least two centuries. Eastern religion and philosophy has tended to see as illusion what the West has generally accepted as objective physical reality. Newtonian physics pictured a clockwork-like universe that led to a Steady State that was essentially immutable and in place for good. Einstein’s relativity and quantum physics changed that view (though Newtonian mechanics still hold for practical macro-universe type matters, e.g., space travel).

The point of all this is that there is a lot we don’t know about reality. Added to this could be the weird findings in quantum mechanics that raise some profound questions about the nature of reality.

Determinism vs Free Will

Here we have another age-old issue. Is human life and all of the choices we make determined by a seemingly endless line of cause-effect events that go back to the origin of the universe? Logically, that would seem to make sense. However, most of us strongly feel that we have free will, and even if we doubt that, tend to live our lives as if we do.

Maybe the neurosciences will provide a more definite answer. Thus far neuroscience research has been supportive of the deterministic position. But, this area of science, while growing fast, is still in a relatively early stage. One of its major long range goals is to achieve a better understanding of the nature of consciousness. Might it be that consciousness in some way provides for free will? However, thus far some of the research that has not supported free will has dealt with consciousness, suggesting that unconscious memory storage and retrieval influences what we experience as free will. In any case, I expect to continue living my life as if I have free will whether I do or not.

Conclusions

The renowned English scientist Thomas Henry Huxley is credited with coining the term “agnostic” as a means of expressing his religious beliefs and first used it in public at a London Metaphysical Society meeting in 1869. He put an “a” before the word “gnostic” (which indicates knowledge) so as to express lack of knowledge regarding religious beliefs, especially belief in God.

Agnosticism involves rejection of both orthodox religious belief and atheism. It also includes acceptance of the lack of absolute, definitive answers to the “Big Questions” discussed above. It is compatible with the philosophy of science of mainstream science, the laws, theories, and principles of which are open-ended and subject to revision or even rejection if evidence so warrants. In my experience both many atheists and firm believers tend to be rather dogmatic when discussing religion. Imagine an open-vs. closed-minded continuum. This continuum would tend to place both atheism and firm traditional religious belief toward the closed end and agnosticism toward the open end. The exploration of ideas and the search for truth requires tolerance of ambiguity and complexity, while the need for certainty serves as an impediment. In the exploration of ideas agnosticism allows for metaphysical speculation which for me can be interesting, while atheists tend to discourage this.

Agnostics are sometimes accused of lacking the courage to openly and definitively reject religious/spiritual beliefs. On the contrary, it takes emotional, intellectual, and spiritual courage to face the truth that when it comes to the Big Questions, we don’t know the truth.

Daniel A. Kennedy, Ed.D., is retired from a career that combined psychology and education spent mostly in university settings (University of Oregon, University of Hawaii, Florida International University). He has been a licensed psychologist in Hawaii and Florida. Retirement years have included adult education programming and study of the humanities, social sciences, history and philosophy of science, and exercise physiology and sports science.

References

Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2006.
Feibleman, James K. Understanding Oriental Philosophy. New York: Meridan, New American Library, 1984.
FitzGerald, Edward. The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. Roslyn, N. Y.: Walter J. Black, 1942.
Gell-Mann, Murray. The Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and the Complex. New York: W. H. Freeman & Co., 1994.
Hitchens, Christopher (Editor). The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Nonbeliever. Philadelphia, Pa.: De Capo Press, 2007.
Ingersoll, Robert G. On The Gods and Other Essays. Amherst, N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1990.
Kurtz, Paul (Editor). Science and Religion: Are They Compatible? Amherst, N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 2003.
Krauss, Lawrence M. Hiding in the Mirror. New York: Viking, 2005.
Noss, David S. A History of the World’s Religions. Upper Saddle River, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1999.
Reese, William L. Dictionary of Philosophy and Religion: Eastern and Western Thought. Amherst, N. Y.: Humanity Books, Prometheus Books, 1998.
Wright, Robert. The Evolution of God. New York: Little, Brown, & Co., 2009.