Guest Author - Les Shulman
By the mid-1920's Clarence Darrow, largely as a result of his being the defense attorney in three highly publicized and sensationalized courtroom dramas, the trials of Leopold and Loeb, John T. Scopes/the so-called “Monkey Trial," and the Sweet family, had secured the reputation of being America’s most famous and infamous criminal lawyer. This “sophisticated small town” lawyer who had evolved from his Kinsman, Ohio roots to become in Chicago a corporate attorney, then a labor attorney (defending among others Eugene Debs), and finally a criminal defense attorney could accurately be described in many ways: a defender of the underdog; a caustic and witty orator; a well-read opinionated freethinker; a gadfly to organized religion, and a liberal defender of civil rights.
However, under no circumstances, as he has sometimes been erroneously labeled either in a misguided attempt to vilify him or just by mistake by various sources both during his life and after his death, should he ever be described as being an atheist; perhaps it was due to the fact that he was a persistent, outspoken, and vociferous critic of organized religion, specifically Christianity, His essence in all aspects of his life was defined by his humanistic atheistic agnosticism with the emphasis directly placed on the “agnosticism.” Darrow was indeed a “doubter” and felt a moral responsibility to be one!
As they are to this day, agnostics in Darrow’s time were accused by many atheists and theists alike of being wishy-washy “fence-sitters” unable to commit to either stating unequivocally that they did not believe in a god or that they were a person who had faith that there was a god. Tired and disdainful of such a know-it-all but having proof-of-nothing attack on agnosticism by atheists and theists, in 1925, Darrow decided that it was time to go on the offensive. Consequently, wanting to put the “pretenders” on the defensive, he stated “I do not consider it an insult but rather a compliment to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure- that is all that agnosticism means.” He was saying that agnosticism is a rational and reasonable position while atheists and theists did not have any evidence to support their deity-related claims and dogmatic proclamations.
Darrow believed that theists, “through ignorance and yearning” were afraid to think for themselves. Thus, they were unwilling to let go of “mythology” and to explore and investigate the true nature of the universe and man’s place in it. Rambunctiously confident in his beliefs, and perhaps wanting to turn the tables on the “fire and brimstone” Christian preachers of his day, the ever confrontational Darrow said “I am an agnostic because I am not afraid to think. I am not afraid of any god in the universe who would send me or any other man or woman to hell. If there were such a being, he would not be a god, he would be a devil.”
Without a doubt (or better yet, because of his doubts), Darrow was an atheistic agnostic because although he did not believe in any god, he was skeptical if any god’s existence could be proven one way or another. The proof of his core belief being one of agnosticism and the scientific and rational reason for it is addressed in this quote- “Man has always speculated on the origin of the universe, including himself. I feel, with Herbert Spencer, that whether the universe had an origin-and if it had- what the origin is will never be known to man.” An atheist would never admit that their fate was eternally tied to the unknowable. In all probability so stalwart and unshakable was he in his agnosticism, that even with the evidence suggested by the “big bang theory,” Darrow would still have reasonable “doubts” about the origin of the universe.
Moreover, Darrow, as a freethinker, felt that it was the responsibility of everyone to reject at face value dogma, authority and tradition. From extremely agnostic and humanistic perspectives he posed the following, “just think of the tragedy of teaching children not to doubt.” That remark was directed not only at non-questioning theists but was also aimed at equally non-questioning atheists. He felt that doubting would lead to consistently thinking freely which most atheists and theists were vehemently opposed to doing as they were “afraid” to do so.
Still, despite compelling evidence in his own words to the contrary, some people, past and present, and some “famous lists of atheists” maintain that this life-long doubter was an atheist. One more time, taken from his essay “Why I Am An Agnostic,” let his words provide the proof. “I am agnostic as to the question of God.” Do you doubt that is what he believed and that is what he was?
