THE NEUTRAL POSITION OF TRANSTHEISM
[Work
in progress]
Transtheism in a
broad sense is a system of thought, philosophical, religious or
spiritually which neither is theism,
atheism nor agnosticism. In a narrower sense, transtheism is a position or
belief that the existence of deity is circumvented or transcended in some
way. Specifically Transtheism is belief in a system of thought, philosophical,
religious or spiritually, with
or without deities or gods, that divinity is attainable.
Generally transtheism has an objective pragmatic belief in
the potential existence of deity but does not have deity as the leading
principle of its system of thought.
S: Statement.
R: Response.
S: Does god exist? How does a transtheist
respond?
R: God is a neutral
reality. Let me explain the idea of neutral reality, it is a reality that is a
possibility and principle of Reality in general. Numbers are neutral realities
in that they are possibilities and principle of Reality in general. So then god
exists neutrally as a possibility and
principle of Reality in general but I am not say that god exists or do not
exist as an object in reality. That is the position of theist or atheist.
S: Why can’t theism, atheism or
agnosticism prove their answers on the question of God(s)
existence?
R: Because the overwhelming
proof they need is not being found or provided for their position. But why
should this be?
Let’s assume for the moment that we human are not totally at fault with our
fallible knowledge. As we turn to nature
or the universe we can acknowledge at least this much, that there is a possibility
that God(s) exist. Based on that fact, one is justified in neither completely
asserting nor rejecting the existence of God(s). This is the neutral position
of my transtheism; it is not the position of theism,
atheism or agnosticism.
Next we
turn to God(s), at least this much can be acknowledged about God(s), they can
be absent. The existence or non-existence of God(s) is not an observable fact
but the absence of God(s) is an observable fact. Based on the fact of absence, one is justified in
neither completely asserting nor rejecting the existence of God(s). Again this is
the neutral position of my transtheism; it is not the position of theism, atheism or agnosticism.
Now, theism,
atheism or agnosticism is positions that cannot be supported by the two facts
that we have presented. However transtheism is supported by these facts as a neutral
position. Why can’t theism, atheism or agnosticism prove their answers on the question of God(s) existence? Because their
answers assumes more than the facts allow.
S: What is
Transtheism and how is it different from theism, atheism or agnosticism?
R: Transtheism
is a philosophical, religious or spiritually neutral position beyond theism,
atheism or agnosticism. Let me illustrate. Does God exist? Theist; yes,
Atheist; no, Agnostic; unknown and Transtheist; neutral, they are all different
from each other but transtheism is a flexible neutral position.
Transtheism neither completely asserts nor rejects the
existence of God(s). This implies the fallibility of answering the question of God(s) existence. This fallibility in
principle is that theism, atheism or agnosticism could be wrong about their beliefs, expectations, or their understanding of
God(s) existence. Because fallibility, practically means that people cannot attain absolute certainty concerning questions of fact. [4]
However transtheism as a position accepts the justification in having the
freedom to flexible tentative judgment, belief or faith. Not the infallible fix
or final belief of theism, atheism or
agnosticism. It is in that sense that Transtheism asserts that the question of
God(s) existence [or some ultimate reality], is neutral ground or a no man’s
land; No one has absolute right to claim the correct answer and that is what
the correct answer should be. Transtheism in its simple form attempts to defend
the position of neutral ground or no man’s land as the correct position.
S: Agnosticism is the belief that the existence or non-existence of any deity is unknown
and possibly unknowable. [1] How is transtheism different?
R: Transtheist
neither completely asserts
nor rejects the existence of God(s). Transtheism is about having the freedom to
a flexible tentative judgment, belief or faith as to whether a God(s) exists or not. Transtheist would say that we cannot have
absolute certainty in knowing or not knowing that any God(s) exist or not. But we are free to have a tentative position or belief on
the question.
S: Strong agnosticism means “I cannot know whether a God(s) exists or not, and neither can you." [1]
S: Strong agnosticism means “I cannot know whether a God(s) exists or not, and neither can you." [1]
R: Transtheist neither completely asserts nor rejects the
existence of God(s). So a transtheist would neither completely asserts nor
rejects the possibility of knowing or
the possibility that someone knows whether a God(s) exists or not to some
degree. But what may be known and someone might know is the consistent
possibility that God(s) can exist. However not knowing whether a God(s) exists or not, this does not exclude one
from having a free flexible tentative judgment or belief, just not a final
judgment or belief. Sense this kind of agnosticism completely rejects the
possibility of knowing the existence of God(s), transtheism is opposed to it.
S: Weak agnosticism would say "I don't know whether any deities
exist or not, but maybe one day, if there is evidence, we can find something
out." Therefore, one will withhold judgment until/if any evidence is
available [1]
R: A transtheist neither completely asserts nor rejects the existence of God(s). But I can
have a tentative judgment or belief. Not knowing would not keep one from having
a tentative judgment or belief but not knowing may keep someone from having a
complete or final judgment or belief. However withholding judgment is an option
for transtheist, so long as it is a tentative position. It is possible to be a
transtheist tentative agnostic.
S: The Apathetic or
pragmatic agnosticism is the view that there is no proof of either the
existence or nonexistence of any deity, but since any deity that may exist
appears unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the
question is largely academic. [1]
R: Saying there is no proof is an indirect way of saying it is unknown that
God(s) exist or not. If a deity does exist and it appears unconcerned, that
does not remove the possibility that it can become or is concerned. The so
called “unconcerned” is a way of allowing us our freedom of thought and action
within the natural order of the universe. The deity is putting as high a
priority on our freedom as it does its own. From a transtheist point of view it
appears to be the will of God(s) and a condition of nature that we cannot
answer the question of their existence but that it should remain neutral ground
or no man’s land. Like a thorn in our psych to remind us of the possibility of
divinity. Either way we are still free to have a flexible tentative judgment or
belief about that deity’s existence.
S: Agnostic theism: The view of those
who do not claim to know of the existence of any deity, but still believe
in such an existence. [1] How is transtheism different from this
point of view?
R: True, transtheism is not
about a claim to absolutely know deities exist but is about neither completely
asserts nor rejects the existence of God(s).
It also is about placing tentative belief over final belief. It is
possible to be a transtheistic tentative theist.
S: Agnostic atheism: The view of those
who do not believe in the existence of any deity, but do not claim to know if a
deity does or does not exist. [1]
R: Again transtheism is not
about a claim to absolutely know deities exist or not but is about neither
completely asserts nor rejects the existence of God(s). It is also about
placing tentative non-belief over complete non-belief. It is also possible to
be a transtheist tentative atheist.
R: Transtheism is about
placing tentative non-belief over complete non-belief. It is also possible to
be a transtheist tentative atheist. However if the atheist claims that
rejection of belief is the absolutely right answer to the question of
God(s) existence, clearly transtheism is opposed to that view.
S: Atheism In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the
position that there are no deities. [2]
R: Transtheist neither completely asserts nor rejects the existence
of God(s). Sense this kind of atheism completely rejects the existence of
God(s), transtheism is opposed to it.
R: Transtheist neither completely asserts nor rejects the existence
of God(s). Sense this kind of theism completely asserts the existence of
God(s), transtheism is opposed to it.
S: Summarize the Transtheist
position.
R: Transtheism is opposed to
any view that claims an absolute answer to the question of God(s) existence.
Because of the implied fallibilism in the view of transtheism itself to neither
completely asserts nor rejects the existence of God(s). In that we cannot attain absolute certainty concerning the fact of God(s)
existence or the fact of its knowableness. It is for that reason that Transtheist
believe that the question of God(s) existence is neutral ground or a no man’s
land and that this is the correct position to take. However a tentative or
secondary belief is justifiable in the quest to test other answers.
[1]The information on agnosticism
came from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
But Transtheism
attempts to defend the position of neutral ground by neutralizing all other
positions, generally in three ways:
1. Passive neutral; by trying to eliminate as
much opposition as it can through agreement to find a unified neutralized area.
This generally creates objective areas.
2. Aggressive neutral; by trying to eliminate
as much agreement as it can through opposition to find a diverse neutralized
area. This generally creates subjective
areas.
3. Main neutral by combining the passive and
aggressive neutrals into an area of unity in diversity as the main neutral
ground. This general creates an aesthetic area.
[2] The information on atheism came from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
[3] The information on theism came from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theism
[4]
C. S. Peirce: But it would be quite misunderstanding the doctrine of fallibilism to suppose that it means that twice
two is probably not exactly four. As I have already remarked, it is not my
purpose to doubt that people can usually count with accuracy. Nor does fallibilism say that men cannot attain a sure
knowledge of the creations of their own minds. It neither affirms nor denies that.
It only says that people
cannot attain absolute certainty concerning questions of fact." (An
Untitled Ms., CP 1.147-149, c. 1897) http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/fallibilism.html
No comments:
Post a Comment