Nontheistic

From Buddhist Encyclopedia

Nontheism (or non-theism) refers to things that aren't theistic. That is, all atheists (weak, strong, implicit, and explicit) are nontheists. Most agnostics are nontheists. The rest of this article assumes a very different (and rare or unique) definition of the word, which must be kept in mind if it is to make sense.

Nontheism (or non-theism), broadly conceived, according to Caporale & Grumelli (1971) , is the absence of belief in both the existence and non-existence of a deity (or deities, or other numinous phenomena). It is used somewhat differently by certain liberal theologians — such as Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong and Anglican bishop John A.T. Robinson — who define a "nontheistic God" as "the ground of all being" rather than as a personal divine being (in Greek Θεος). The word is often employed as a blanket term for all terms which are not theistic, including atheism (both strong and weak) and agnosticism, as well as certain Eastern religions like Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism.

Relationship to Agnosticism

Used in the strict sense, as by those who self-identify as nontheists or nontheistics, the term describes worldviews for which the question of divinity is regarded as irrelevant and meaningless. When used in this sense, nontheism is often confused with agnosticism, although there is a distinct difference. An agnostic, by definition, views the question of God's existence to be necessarily unanswered, but not necessarily irrelevant. A nontheist, by definition, views the question to be necessarily irrelevant, and also may or may not find it necessarily unanswerable. Thus, it is possible that an agnostic could consider the nature of God to be an issue of tremendous importance. It is also possible that he could consider the question unimportant. Provided that he remains convinced that the existence of God is unknowable, he remains an agnostic. Likewise, a nontheist may or may not believe the existence of God to be inherently unknowable; this has no bearing on his status as a nontheist. It is possible that one individual could be both an agnostic and a nontheist; indeed, most nontheists are agnostics, and vice versa.

Nevertheless, the concepts are distinct, and it is entirely possible that one could be exclusively a nontheist, or exclusively an agnostic. Many early agnostics were not nontheists, in that they considered religious questions to be worthwhile and important. The French Proto-Fascist Charles Maurras, for instance, was an avowed agnostic. However, he was also a staunch clericalist, viewing the Catholic religion as a necessary part of society, and the question of divinity as an integral part of the (typical) human psyche. Maurras could be said to be an agnostic, but not a nontheist.

Many modern-day atheists could be described as agnostic nontheists, in that they regard the existence of God as both meaningless and unknown. However, an exclusive nontheist avoids the question of God's existence entirely because the question is irrelevant.

Nontheistic worldview

When faced with the question of whether gods exist, a nontheist would respond that the question itself is unimportant, that it concerns information that is unfalsifiable, meaningless, superfluous, etc. To a nontheist, the issue of God's existence is no different than, for example, the existence of invisible, intangible elephants. This conviction is generally based on skepticism and empiricism, although it may also be motivated by the pragmatic desire to rid oneself of an inconvenient and irresolvable dilemma.

Additional pragmatic motivations arise from considering the various functions that the concept of a deity serves, and finding those functions either unimportant or unresolved by the concept of a deity. For instance, if one entertains the existence of a deity in order to face concerns over the end of life, then the loss of a concern over the end of life diminishes the need to consider the existence of a deity. Likewise if the concept of a deity provides a resolution to ontological questions such as "how did the universe begin?" then the need for the concept will be lessened to the extent that one no longer finds troubling his or her ignorance about the possible ontology of the universe. In short, if the concept of deity has no functional value for a person, that person is likely to be comfortable as a nontheist.

Insentient life, infants, etc.

On rare occasions, the term nontheistic is applied to living beings that are intellectually incapable of establishing any kind of positive or negative opinion about a deity, e.g. animals, fetuses, infants. This usage is disputed by some theists, who believe that all creatures are innately theistic, and that departure from theism constitutes a pathological turn away from nature. Most nontheists reject the latter belief, since they presume belief in a deity to be a mere social construction, with no relation to nature and biology.

Interestingly, the Roman Catholic church once held that unbaptized infants were unsaved, and would therefore be consigned to Limbo if death took place before baptism could be completed. This suggests that the Catholic church considers (or once considered) nontheism to be the innate condition of mankind, reflecting the estrangement of man from God inherent in original sin.

Nontheism in philosophy

A large number of philosophers have historically been nontheists, although, for the sake of convenience and comprehension, many of these have publicly categorized themselves as atheists or agnostics. The most famously nontheistic school were the Logical Positivists and the Analytic philosophers, including Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and A.J. Ayer. The Positivist position, as formulated by Ayer, was that "asking whether God exists is simply not meaningful." The perceived dichotomy between theism and atheism was merely a case of mutually exclusive suppositions, neither of which could be empirically tested, and neither of which made any kind of meaningful assertion. To a Logical Positivist, a statement like "God exists" is a kind of tautology, since the very concept of a deity is (in the view of the Positivists) inseparable from the assertion that it exists. It would therefore be something like saying "dragons have wings". By the same token, the positive rejection of such a tautology (i.e. "There is no God") would itself be a meaningless tautology, akin to saying "dragons do not have wings". According to the Positivists, neither assertion has meaning, since both involve the creation of a separate entity, one having wings and another not having wings. The fact that neither creature is observable renders the issue meaningless. By recognizing the dilemma of divinity as a similar fallacy, the Positivists hoped to escape the endless cycle of belief and disbelief. Also these claims might have parrels with the claims of Husserl's phonomenology

Nontheism in Buddhism

The first historically significant nontheist was probably Gautama Buddha, who, when asked whether God existed, or any similar question of metaphysics, usually responded with complete silence (see also mu). These questions became known as the Fourteen Indeterminates.<ref>

On one occasion, when presented with a problem of metaphysics by the monk Malunkyaputta, Buddha responded with a story of a man shot with a poisoned arrow. The man's family summons the doctor to have the poison removed, and the man given an antidote:

"But the man refuses to let the doctor do anything before certain questions can be answered. The wounded man demands to know who shot the arrow, what his caste and job is, and why he shot him. He wants to know what kind of bow the man used and how he acquired the ingredients used in preparing the poison. Malunkyaputta, such a man will die before getting the answers to his questions. It is no different for one who follows the Way. I teach only those things necessary to realize the Way. Things which are not helpful or necessary, I do not teach."<ref name=hanh> Although Buddhism has a vast number of scriptures and practices, the fundamental core of Buddhism, the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path, are distinguished in the world of religion as being absent any mention of God(s) or any notion or worship of any deity. They are purely ethical and meditative guidelines based on the truths of psychological suffering due to impermanence. Zen Master Bassui (1327-1387) had strong words for those applying notions of divinity to any separate beings, such as bodhisattvas:

"... so you should realize that all the names of the bodhisattvas are just different names for the nature of mind. As an expedient in the World-Honored-One's sermons, he defined things using certain names, and with these names he pointed to the truth. Ordinary people, unaware of this truth, become attached to the names and, in the hopes of attaining Buddhahood, seek the Buddha and Dharma outside their minds. It's like cooking sand in the hopes of producing rice."<ref name=braverman> Despite an involved Buddhist cosmology, the creation of Things, along with their attachments and aversions (the illusion of maya), is attributed to ignorance or avidya; and attaining to Buddhahood is the end of such ignorance. This technical emphasis on creation, within the mind, contrasts with the notion of any God initating a cosmological creation story, as in theistic traditions. Nontheism remains a common element of many schools of Buddhism. However, many theology|theologians have argued that Buddhists have merely transferred their theistic devotion to ancestors, bodhisattvas, kami, and other alleged "deity surrogates". Other observers have dismissed these practices as mere folk traditions, analogous to the pagan undertones present in European Christian worship, and not a feature of higher religion. Most modern Buddhist teachers, such as Soyen Shaku and Robert Baker Aitken, avoid addressing the existence or nonexistence of deities, regarding the issue as an indulgence and a distraction.

[edit]

See also

• Falsifiability
• Freethought
• God in Buddhism
• Irreligion
• Mu
• Secular humanism

[edit]

References

<references/>

• Caporale, R. & Grumelli, A. (eds.) (1971) The Culture of Unbelief. Univ. of California Press, Berkeley.

[edit]

External links

• Freethought Association
• TheInfidels.org Site and Forum
• The End of Pascal's Wager: Only Nontheists Go to Heaven (2002)

Bold text