Possibilianism is a philosophy that rejects both the diverse claims of traditionaltheism and the positions of certainty instrong atheism in favor of a middle, exploratory ground.[1][2][3][4][5] The term was invented by Robbie Parrish,[6] a friend of neuroscientistDavid Eagleman who defined the term in relation to his 2009 book,Sum: Forty Tales from the Afterlives.[7]
Asked whether he was an atheist or a religious person on aNational Public Radio interview in February 2009, Eagleman replied "I call myself a Possibilian: I'm open to...ideas that we don't have any way of testing right now."[7] In a subsequent interview with theNew York Times, Eagleman expanded on the definition:
"Our ignorance of the cosmos is too vast to commit to atheism, and yet we know too much to commit to a particular religion. A third position,agnosticism, is often an uninteresting stance in which a person simply questions whether his traditional religious story (say, a man with a beard on a cloud) is true or not true. But with Possibilianism I'm hoping to define a new position — one that emphasizes the exploration of new, unconsidered possibilities. Possibilianism is comfortable holding multiple ideas in mind; it is not interested in committing to any particular story."[3]
In aNew Yorker profile of Eagleman—entitled "The Possibilian"—Burkhard Bilger wrote:[8]
Science had taught him to be skeptical of cosmic certainties, [Eagleman] told me. From the unfathomed complexity of brain tissue—"essentially an alien computational material"—to the mystery ofdark matter, we know too little about our own minds and the universe around us to insist on strict atheism, he said. "And we know far too much to commit to a particular religious story." Why not revel in the alternatives? Why not imagine ourselves, as he did inSum, as bits of networked hardware in a cosmic program, or as particles of some celestial organism, or any of a thousand other possibilities, and then test those ideas against the available evidence? "Part of the scientific temperament is this tolerance for holding multiplehypotheses in mind at the same time," he said. "AsVoltaire said, uncertainty is an uncomfortable position. But certainty is an absurd one."
An adherent of possibilianism is called apossibilian.[9][10][11] The possibilian perspective is distinguished fromagnosticism in its active exploration of novel possibilities and its emphasis on the necessity of holding multiple positions at once if there is no available data to privilege one over the others.[5][12] Eagleman has emphasized that possibilianism reflects the scientific temperament of creativity andintellectual humility in the face of "the known unknowns."[13][14]
According to theDallas Morning News andMSNBC, the possibilian concept—including various spellings (e.g. "possibillion") and modifications (e.g. "possibilitarian")—has become popular on theinternet.[11][15] By November 2009,The List Magazine wrote: "Googling 'possibilian', the position Eagleman invented to explain his belief system, throws up the beginnings of a worldwide movement."[16]
Articles about possibilianism have appeared in major news outlets around the globe—for example, in theDaily Monitor ofUganda,[17]The Economic Times[18] andNew Scientist.[19]
In an article in theNew Statesman, the atheist authorPhilip Pullman declared himself a possibilian,[20] as didWired magazine founding editorKevin Kelly in an interview in theLA Times.[21] By April 2011, "close to a thousandFacebook members had switched theirreligious affiliation to Possibilianism."[8]
Sam Harris (anew atheist) has attacked possibilianism as "intellectually dishonest", and its description of strict atheism as a straw man. Harris writes that the position Eagleman espouses "is, simply, atheism." Harris calls on Eagleman "to admit that “possibilianism,” this middle position of yours, is just a piece of performance art, rather than a serious thesis."[22]In response, Eagleman stated that "[Harris'] braggadocio appears to be emblematic of the neo-atheist posture, and confirms why I don't feel completely at home in that camp."[23]Journalist Steve Volk in the Huffington Post suggested that Harris and Eagleman should be "new allies": "If we're going to get beyond the typical exchanges between new atheists and the religious, I'd argue that it's through figures like Eagleman and Harris that we will find the most productive path: men who are eager to use science while demonstrating a capacity to consider ideas from other areas of human experience and systems of thought."[24]