From the general characteristic of the non-classical theory of knowledge, you must remember a list of views on the philosophical aspect of the possibility of cognition of the world. Optimism is a philosophical position that recognizes the knowledge of the world by man, skepticism is a philosophical position that raises doubts about the achievement of absolute knowledge. Agnosticism is a position that denies the possibility of cognition.
Let's take a closer look at what agnosticism is, who agnostics are, and why they deny the possibility of knowing the world.
Agnosticism is …
According to classical sources, this term is deciphered as follows:
Agnosticism is a term in philosophy, the theory of knowledge and theology. Supporters of agnosticism consider it fundamentally impossible to know objective reality through subjective experience and impossible to know any ultimate and absolute foundations of reality.
The word “agnosticism” in translation from ancient Greek means “unknowable, ” that is, the term implies that the world around us cannot be known using only subjective perception — this is vision, hearing, analysis of the information received, because perception by ears, eyes and brain can distort reality.
Still, this direction, which denies the possibility of knowing the world, seems incomprehensible? Then let's figure it out.
Agnostics - who is it?
Any person from your environment, and maybe you yourself, can be an adherent of an agnostic view of the knowledge of the world. Neither religion nor political aspects affect this.
People strive to learn the truth, get to the bottom of the truth, to the very essence, using all available methods. In order for a conviction to become true, it must be proved; accordingly, proof is needed. And if it can neither be refuted nor proved, then there can be no talk of further judgments, because the first and second sides may turn out to be true. There are many such examples, so they deny the possibility of knowing the world.
For example, God. Does he exist? This is neither proven nor disproved. An agnostic does not seek to follow the majority opinion, he is ready to talk about the existence of God, having only good reason.
At the same time, agnostics are neither believers nor atheists in its purest form. They are something in between and hold the view that a person cannot know the whole world because of his limitations and subjectivity, because it is far from the fact that the picture that your eyes are delivering to your brain is exactly that.
By definition, any system cannot comprehend itself on its own. What can we say then about the divine or true nature of things that a person is trying to know and explain. Therefore, agnostics, not believing in God, do not refute the possibility of his existence, because neither one nor the other has been proved. Agree, it's silly to argue about what you can’t understand.
