Agnosticism as Religion
by Chen Chapman
Speaking as a highly “committed Agnostic” (a phrase which has caused me to laugh not a little at myself through the years), I do objectively accept the idea that Agnosticism can arguably be considered a religion.
If religion can be acceptably defined as a system of spiritual belief, then it follows that Agnosticism must be a form of religion, in that it is a spiritual, or “faith-driven”, commitment to being unable to qualitatively and quantifiably identify, label or name the phenomena or force(s) that are responsible for the existence of (all of it).
In other words, we Agnostics are equally faithful to the idea that our non-beliefs are correct and we will thus not be eternally damned as a result of our non-beliefs. Seein’ as how we don’t know/don’t care, an’ all.
On the other hand, if religion is acceptably defined as a series or set of ritual behaviors reflecting and/or supporting one’s spiritual beliefs, then it may be a more difficult conclusion to draw, as there are no consistently identifiable unifying rituals embedded in the philosophical practice of Agnosticism…except perhaps critical thinking and analysis, which is neither exclusive to nor always present in Agnosticism.