Agnostik

In early modern philosophy, Blaise Pascal (1623–1662) argued that even if certain knowledge of God is impossible, one should nonetheless choose to believe because of potential practical benefits.[114] Following an empiricist outlook, David Hume (1711–1776) held that knowledge of the world is limited to sensory experience, leading him to conclude that knowledge of a supernatural God is impossible. Inspired by Hume, Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) contended that human understanding is limited to the realm of appearances and cannot extend to things-in-themselves, which implies that the existence of God is not accessible to theoretical knowledge.[115]

William Kingdon Clifford and William James disagreed about whether belief without sufficient evidence is always wrong.[116]

Sir William Hamilton (1788–1856) developed Kant's ideas about the nature of knowledge to defend agnosticism, maintaining that to understand something is to impose certain limits on it. He held that this process necessarily misconstrues God since God has no such limits, making accurate knowledge of the divine impossible.[117] Drawing on Hamilton, Henry Longueville Mansel (1820–1871) concluded that reason can attain only relative knowledge while knowledge of the absolute is contradictory. For Mansel, the realm of theology lies beyond rational inquiry and depends on revelation and faith.[118] Hamilton's thought also influenced Herbert Spencer (1820–1903), who sought a comprehensive philosophical system synthesizing science and religion. He held that an ultimate reality is responsible for phenomena while knowledge is limited to phenomena, with science dedicated to what is knowable and religion dedicated to what is unknowable.[119]