What is Agnosticism?

What is Agnosticism?

Most modern-day references define agnosticism as a position that something is unknown or unknowable. However, if you look into Huxley's writings, you'll find that agnosticism was not a position against knowledge or certainty but rather it was anti-dogma or against unwarranted certainty. The main difference between the two definitions is that the first one denies knowledge, while Huxley's definition does not. This article will explore what agnosticism was intended to mean according to its founder.

According to Thomas Huxley, agnosticism was not a position of uncertainty. The following quote explains this:

The extent of the region of the uncertain, the number of the problems the investigation of which ends in a verdict of not proven, will vary according to the knowledge and the intellectual habits of the individual Agnostic. I do not very much care to speak of anything as "unknowable."2 What I am sure about is that there are many topics about which I know nothing; and which, so far as I can see, are out of reach of my faculties. But whether these things are knowable by any one else is exactly one of those matters which is beyond my knowledge, though I may have a tolerably strong opinion as to the probabilities of the case.

Here we can see that Thomas Huxley claims to be uncertain about many things, and perhaps that gives the impression that is all agnosticism amounted to. But he did not discount that others would have knowledge in areas where he was uncertain. In fact, Huxley describes agnosticism, not as a view, but rather it's a standard or principle that one applies to their investigations. Huxley states the following:

If any one had preferred this request to me, I should have replied that, if he referred to agnostics, they have no creed; and, by the nature of the case, cannot have any. Agnosticism, in fact, is not a creed, but a method, the essence of which lies in the rigorous application of a single principle.
...
Positively the principle may be expressed: In matters of the intellect, follow your reason as far as it will take you, without regard to any other consideration. And negatively: In matters of the intellect do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable.

This is among Huxley's clearest descriptions of what agnosticism involves. Huxley's use of this principle in his investigations, especially on religion, often led him to the conclusion of "not proven" which amounted to uncertainty on if the claim was true or false. But again, that is not to say that agnostics and others can't use the same principle to obtain knowledge on some matter.

To further understand what agnosticism is would also take understanding why Huxley invented the term, to begin with. He explains in his writings that he coined the word 'agnostic' to be a position against dogmatism which involves unwarranted certainty. Here's Huxley again in his own words,

From what precedes, I think it becomes sufficiently clear that Dr. Wace's account of the origin of the name of "Agnostic" is quite wrong. Indeed, I am bound to add that very slight effort to discover the truth would have convinced him that, as a matter of fact, the term arose otherwise. I am loath to go over an old story once more; but more than one object which I have in view will be served by telling it a little more fully than it has yet been told.
...
When I reached intellectual maturity and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; Christian or a freethinker; I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer; until, at last, I came to the conclusion that I had neither art nor part with any of these denominations, except the last. The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure they had attained a certain "gnosis,"–had, more or less successfully, solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble.

That last part in bold font best explains the dogmatism that led Huxley to coin the word 'agnostic'. The standard or principle that Huxley advocated for was meant to guard against dogmatism and other motivations that can lead someone to go beyond what reason and science could prove. In another article (here), I explained why many deviate from reason, whether it be because they want their view to be true or some other factor, but that's beyond the scope of the present article.

In conclusion, agnosticism is a principle or standard for establishing certainty. The standard is to have certainty in views or conclusions that are backed by reason and science. As easy as it sounds, people do not follow that standard even in a purely intellectual context. The purpose of agnosticism was not to be anti-knowledge or anti-certainty but rather it's to be anti-dogmatic or against unwarranted certainty.


Citations (All of Huxley's essays can be read on Clark University website: here):

1. Huxley, Thomas. "Agnosticism and Christianity." Collected Essays V (1889).

2. Huxley, Thomas. "Agnosticism." Collected Essays V (1889).

3. Huxley, Thomas. "Agnosticism: A Symposium." The Agnostic Annual (1884).