| Agnostic | |
| Summary | |
| Best summary word for my belief is agnostic. I am so because I openly laugh at and scorn organized religions, but I am not an atheist for I can not answer hard foundational questions about the universe, and I have not found satisfactory answers to my questions, despite trying. | |
| Organized religions | |
| I have personal knowledge of some parts of Hinduism and have no reasons to believe that they are objected to in any parts of Hinduism - I object to Gita, to Dayanand Sarasvati, etc I object to Christianity, Islam, Jainism, and Buddhism after their failure to adequately address the criticisms in Dayanand's light of truth, chapter 11. | |
| Science atheism | |
| I object to science atheism for the simple reason that I have not encountered so far any scientists who can satisfactorily answer my questions on the origins on the Universe, even though I have asked mathematicians, philosophers, scientists, professors, ... | |
| Legal theism | |
| I suspect I alienated a Nashua judge and hurt my own case because he asked me to swear "...So help me God". Apart from swearing being objectionable per se, this really hurt for questions I had were things like "what am I oathing to?" (you have to be very careful in a US court), "Why should God help me?", "Who does s/he help", "what is the right language to use (singular plural male female neuter, none, any). All in all, it was a hurtful disaster for the judge wrongly thought I was pulling his leg. My conclusion is strengthened. | |
| My agnosticism | |
| The concept of God can not be argued for or against. Creation and reality posit something was there at least once. Failure of organized thinking implies to me that the purveyors of so called knowledge are trafficking in human emotions for money. The best policy, I claim, is to passively let some one else have whatever semantics they associate with God, and reply surely, but only when they want to know. | |