Expert: Austin Cline - 4/30/2008

Question
QUESTION: How does saying 'knowledge of gods is impossible' entail knowledge of gods (and thus refute itself) any more than saying 'we can't know how many times George Washington scratched his rump on 12/14/1774' entails knowledge of Washington's 12/14/1774 rump-scratching activities (and thus refutes itself) ???

ANSWER: You can't claim that knowledge of X is impossible without knowing something about X to begin with. If you genuinely know nothing about X, then it's impossible to say in advance whether knowledge of it is impossible or not.

We know something about GW and we know something about rump scratching generally. We know enough about both to realize that such information isn't recorded, and so unless time travel is invented then we won't know how many times GW might have scratched himself on any particular day. See, all kinds of knowledge is involved in making such a determination.

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: We know something about the universe generally.  And we know the basic concept of god is "a consciousness behind the universe."  We know enough to realize that unless a metaphysical being detector is invented, we won't know whether there's a consciousness behind the universe.  Where's the contradiction?

Answer
"And we know the basic concept of god is "a consciousness behind the universe." "

We know that that is a characteristic ascribed to some gods by some believers. We don't "know" that that is what "god is," though. No one can claim to "know" that and still be an agnostic. A person can't claim to know what a god is supposed to really be without also claiming to know something about god - and that contradicts agnosticism.