My Views on key issues

[AgnosticBoy]

Religion/Spirituality:
1. Who or what is God? (Atheists can answer in their own way, even if it's a response expressing skepticism).
2. Which is the one true religion?
3. Is Religion really necessary?
4. Do you believe in the afterlife?
5. Would a religious experience be enough to make you a believer or spiritual?

Philosophy:
1. What is your worldview (Christian, atheist, agnostic, neither??) and why?
2. Do objective morals exist? (edited on 10/17/2022)
3. Does free-will exist? (edited on 11/10/2022)
4. Is there a good hybrid theory drawing from both Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill?
5. Should Religion be subordinate to Philosophy?

Politics:
1. What is your political affiliation (Democrat, Republican, unaffiliated, other) and why?
2. Is separation of Church and State good or bad for America?
3. What is your position on people owning guns?
4. What is your position on abortion?
5. Is the Republican Party anti-rational of late?

Science:
1. What is the origin of the Universe? (Edited on 10/5/2022 for clarity)
2. Is consciousness a product of the brain or something greater or separate?
3. Does one accept the tenants of the Scientific Method such as observation, hypothesis, prediction, experimentation, and analysis?
4. Is the theory of evolution and creationism reconcilable?
5. Does science have to be limited to methodological naturalism?
6. What is your view on sexual orientation?

*All of my views are subject to change based on any new logic and evidence for/against them.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Does free-will exist?

I believe that free-will exists in degrees instead of being an all or nothing ability. Even if someone disagrees and instead accepts determinism, then I would say that determinism exists in degrees since not everything is controlled to the same degree. Take for instance a lion. A lion can not change its behavior since it only acts off of its animal instincts. In contrast, humans are not controlled and restricted in the same way. I don't follow and act off of my instincts blindly. I have the ability to know about the factors that influence my behavior and use that knowledge to manipulate those causal factors to reach any goal or desired behavior (anything humanly possible). To convince me otherwise would take showing how a human is just as controlled/restricted as a lion or even a tree branch.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Do objective morals exist?
I do not accept that objective morals exist because there is no validated ontology nor epistemology for it. I would think that part of the goal for objective morality would be to preserve order and survival. But thinking of this objective in terms of ontology, I question why does one part of nature (human evolution) meet that objective (to preserve mankind) while the rest of nature (the Universe beyond humans) doesn't. For instance, even if all of of mankind were on the same page on morality but then we can still be wiped out by a huge asteroid, viruses, etc. In terms of epistemology, I question the purpose of objective moral norms if there's no objective way of knowing about all of them. Without having something more than just opinion or sociocultural conditioning, then we can't truly know which moral claims are right or wrong.

Edited on 10/17/2022

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Is Religion really necessary?

I don't believe that anyone can be good without religion. I say this keeping in mind that a person does not have to be religious in order to follow at least some religious values. For instance, eventhough objective moral values don't exist (or not proven, at least), but most do treat morality as if they are sacred and/or objective. When it comes to secularism, the topic of morality is an open question. Not having a structured or set morality can more easily lead someone to having loose standards in life, being more at risk to promiscuity, instability, etc, imo. I also think religion also has negatives in that it can lead someone to live a restricted life, shunning worldly pleasures, and to me that is boring and not fulfilling. I believe secularism can be used in moderation to counteract some of those negatives.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

1. What is your worldview (Christian, atheist, agnostic, neither??) and why?

After reading Thomas Huxley's writings, I decided that my worldview had to be agnosticism. Huxley's agnosticism involved being open to question/explore anything (but not accept until proven) and making sure that certainty was based on logic and verifiable evidence as opposed to being based on authority or some overconfidence in a theory. Applying his standard has helped me create a very good balance between open-mindedness and skepticism. When it comes to open-mindedness aspect, I try to be open to any facts. Unlike many atheists and theists (and even scientists), I have no set worldview that I hold onto unquestionably (.e.g. Creationism, metaphysical naturalism, etc). When it comes to the skeptical/inquiring part, I'm not looking to debunk extraordinary claims as some atheists are criticized for doing when they only consider naturalistic explanations and dismiss anything short of that. In contrast, my skepticism is more open in that I'm willing to consider any good evidence, even if it goes against the materialistic worldview.

Edited my response on 9/24/2022.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

What is your political affiliation (Democrat, Republican, unaffiliated, other) and why?

I agree with some of the policies of the Democrats and Republicans but I still consider myself unaffiliated or an independent. The reason for not affiliating is because both parties tend to be very partisan by showing an unwillingness to adopt ANY good policy, and instead they tend to only accept policy just from their side. When the latter is done, it shows that politics nowadays is more about which side you're on (so that you can maintain power) as opposed to what's right or true. As an independent, I feel that I have the freedom to accept good policies from any party or come up with my own ideas or remain agnostic. Not only is the partisanship a problem, but it also seems like both parties are becoming more corrupt after each election. It's hard to trust any politician.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

What is the origin of the Universe?

I accept the Big Bang Theory for the origin of the Universe, w/ Universe meaning all of space, time, and its contents. However, if we define the Universe as being all that exists (even beyond space-time and matter), then I don't accept that the Big Bang explains its origins. I'm agnostic on that issue. At first, I leaned towards the rationale that theists used, which is that something would've had to cause the bang. Unlike theists, I never limited that something to being God. However, when we get to the quantum level of the Universe, things behave in a probabilistic way; and there's even unpredictability or randomness. If randomness exists, then that would certainly go against a deterministic Universe at some level. Although, there may be a difference between quantum events being unpredictable or unknowable but that alone does necessarily mean not having a cause. I can't find any consensus on this but it does lead me to question the traditional understanding of causality, including the cause of the Universe.

Edited on 10/5/2022 for clarity

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Is separation of Church and State good or bad for America?

I believe that separation of Church and State is bad for America because we end up restricting the good with the bad. Ideally, I'd want good religious views to become law or at least have just as much opportunity to become one as secular-based policies/ideas. The good religious views would be those that are supported with logic and evidence or that serve a common good at the least. Besides that, the line between religion and State is often blurred, like when religious based rules (e.g. do not murder) are the same as secular state laws. We wouldn't say that government is endorsing religion or that it's bad to do so if they support a law that says "do not murder". Also, some conservatives would claim that their religious views are also their personal/political view, which I take to mean that they would have it even if they weren't religious.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

What is your view on sexual orientation?

I believe everyone has the capacity to be sexually attracted to anything (objectum-sexuality or objectophilia) or anyone, and that includes relationship type (monogamy or polyamory). The reason that someone would not act out this open sexuality is because we restrict or limit ourselves (and justifiably so, imo) based on socio-cultural/moral considerations/conditioning. This can be best shown by looking at the sexuality of women who aren't as restricted as men. Personally, I've met several women that had sexual orientation centered more on personality than on gender (pansexual). Theoretically, these women could find themselves attracted to men, women, and even non-binary genders. Also, there are studies that show that women can become sexually stimulated by viewing sexual acts that differ from their sexual orientation (e.g. a straight girl watching same-sex acts), and even becoming stimulated from watching animals have sex. To me, this shows that we are more open than what we think we are.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

What is your position on abortion?

I am for allowing women to have abortions with certain restrictions. The only restriction on abortion would be that it should not be done after the first trimester, and that's because I draw the line with awareness and pain. There is no consensus on when simple awareness (as opposed to all of the loaded concepts that goes along with consciousness - thoughts, self-awareness, etc.) begins but the ability for fetal pain is thought to exist starting around 20 weeks of gestation. So, I'm against abortions after 20 weeks, and to be on the safe side I'd even stop abortions after the first trimester. I'd even have an exception to this which would be if the pregnancy would cause a life-threatening problem for the mother.