In the absence of actual evidence agnosticism would seem the only credible final intellectual position, defined as an extreme position of not believing or disbelieving.Not really...
So you would separate belief from knowledge. Do theists do that? Surely that weakens belief if only by saying it’s different from actually knowing.So far, the theists I've pointed this out to, and diagrammed for them, see the logic and understand the concept. Of course almost all of them declare themselves a "gnostic theist" - but a few of them I've explained and re-explained until they concede they are probably more realistically an "agnostic theist."
It probably sounds crazy or at least implausible, but I liken it to encountering something completely new and then ‘trying out’ one position or another mentally by creating ‘ego states’ that fully believe or disbelieve in different aspects of the position.Very interesting. And very impressive if you can do it impartially. I think I might have a hard time remaining impartial while constructing the view-points. And I'd bet few-if-any theists could manage that mental gymnastic without being partial.