Of late I have been noticing people proudly declaring themselves as “Agnostic”. But what I fail to understand is that even though they claim to part of the free thinking world of which unobtrusively this idea had sprouted, they seem to be firm believers in their own faiths handed down to them since childhood.

Now is that possible or is that the “in-thing” when asked about as to whats ones’ religion is? Or is it the wider & intellectual side of the oxymoron state which this world seems to be moving to? With so many “ifs”, “dos & don’ts”, etc….I think people in large feel seemingly comfortable in keeping their feet in both boats.

Now who is an agnostic. The one principle linking all meanings of "Agnostic" is that God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved, on the basis of current evidence. Agnostics note that some theologians and philosophers have tried to to prove, for millennia, that God exists. Others have attempted to prove that God does not exist. Agnostics feel that neither side has convincingly succeeded at their task. What I feel is that they are the new age “Atheists” who wants to keep their religious side intact, only to be flaunted in dire cases of insecurity. You will come across a whole lot of these new age thinkers which will even put our political parties to shame, take for instance the umpteen Congress in Kerala (almost all the 26 alphabets have been used up).

Agnostic Theists: Those who believe that a deity probably exists but not sure. (Then why not believe than negate?)

Agnostic Atheists: Those who believe that it is very improbable that a deity exists but still there is something. (What??)

Empirical Agnostics: They believe that God may exist, but that little or nothing can be known about him/her/it/them. (OK, understandable, Identity Crisis.)

Agnostic Humanists: These individuals are undecided about the existence of God. Further, they do not really consider the question to be particularly important. They have derived their moral and behavioral codes from secular considerations. Their ethical behavior would not be altered even if a deity were proven to exist. (Still hard to let go off God?)

Spiritual Agnostic: They believe that one does not have to possess faith in a higher power or a particular religion in order to be spiritual. (What is spirit-ual then?)

Religious Agnostic: They observe a religious tradition but observe it only as a tradition. (Now is that inclusive of religion or minus religion and if minus then why this term?)

Rational Agnostic: They stress on logic, reason and proof. For them spirituality can never provide anything other than what they already experienced in this materialistic world. But they also never defy either the existence or the possibility of God. (Is that blind logic or convoluted logic?)

What next Political Agnostic? I wouldn’t be surprised!!