Hmm...agnosticism as a not-knowing SEEKING for what is true, good, and just could be a wise way of being human. The caps on seeking is the key. Obviously, you have done a lot of sincere seeking, but 'agnosticism' as a life stance is dangerous and almost always harmful.

Usually agnosticism, not-knowing as a life stance, means not only not "KNOWING" the Ultimate Nature of Reality, but also a skepticism about anything except hard facts and for matter and energy:-(

It seems that a better way is to start with our day-to-day moral encounters and decisions. Even if humans don't or can't discern the ultimate nature of existence and the cosmos, every moment we live, we need to make moral decisions based upon what we think is true about existence.

Start with what is probably true: moral realism is true; humans have inherent worthless humans are morally responsible, human rights exist, compassion is far better than cruelty, generosity than selfishness, seeing one's nation as a humble ideal, not putting it FIRST, etc.

From that moral foundation, then one can make tentative, educated guesses as to ultimate questions. Check out Oxford professor Keith Ward's books such as The Big Questions in Science and Religion.

 

Thanks Daniel. Interesting thoughts.

I find that having a ground of "I do not know" for some very basic theological things like miracles, and afterlife, angels, demons, and salvation, Holy Writ, etc,
Liberates me to BELIEVE. I can dive much deeper into the undertow of belief, if I do not feel any compulsion to defend my belief or promote it as true to any one else.

The examples you give are worth defending and promoting and do not require a belief in God at all.
"humans have inherent worthless(sic) humans are morally responsible, human rights exist, compassion is far better than cruelty, generosity than selfishness, seeing one's nation as a humble ideal, not putting it FIRST, etc."
love, and respect. Peggy