It is my purpose here to provide definitions of the philosophical positions that provide me with the foundation for my arguments.

  • Agnostic Atheism — The position that while it is not possible to absolutely prove that there is no God or are no gods, I withhold belief in a God or gods because I have never been presented with evidence that adds up to anything even remotely resembling a solid case in support of this belief.
  • Skepticism — I would say that I am a philosophical skeptic in general, and an empirical skeptic specifically. That is, I require all information to be based on evidence and do not make any absolute truth claims. Any time I might use the word, “truth” or “fact” I am referring only to the best available knowledge about the probability of a theory being an accurate description of reality.
  • Secular Humanism — I refer you to the Council for Secular Humanism’s excellent approximation, available here: and would encourage you further to avail yourself of Tom Flynn’s excellent essay on the subject, also available at that website under the heading: “Secular Humanism Defined.”
  • Philosophical Taoism — I’ll need to be very explicit here: I believe in no metaphysical claim and subscribe to no cosmology, although I find the religiously Taoist mythology to be fascinating and entertaining. The elements I feel some connection with are confined exclusively to the concept of wu-wei, the three treasures of the sage, the unity of opposition (yin-yang,) and a notion of the Tao. All of these things are primarily concerned with providing useful approximations and general methods of framing thoughts rather than establishing exacting syllogisms.