Status Updates From Agnosticism: A Very Short I...

we all are agnostics

The onus is on defenders of the teapot ( ragon) to establish their
position. The initial assumption, which requires no defence, is
that it does not exist, and we need positive reasons to move us
away from this assumption.
Religion: To question why extraordinary claims (like the existence of a deity) are accepted without sufficient evidence

The fact that we cannot prove that there is no dragon and no
teapot does not make the likelihood of their existing equal to the
likelihood of their not existing.
Whereas we cannot positively rule out the teapot (and, we might
add, the dragon) with 100% certainty, it is reasonable to suppose
the likelihood of its existing to be very small, or at least, much less
than the probability of its existing.

The fact that we cannot prove that there is no dragon and no
teapot does not make it reasonable to suppose that they exist.
The fact that we cannot prove that there is no dragon and no
teapot does not make it unreasonable to suppose that they do not
exist.

David Hume and his Fork
'interrupted my dogmatic slumber'- a reference to Hume's
tendency to undermine claims to knowledge in certain areas of
thought. Here, then, is another significant figure in the story of
agnosticism.

The Konigsberg pr·ofessor who sought to demonstrate how, in a
wm·Id ;tlmost wholly unknown to us, our moral sense can nevertheless
lend us to God: Immanuel Kant

Rationalism, in contrast, holds that it is possible to gain knowledge purely through the exercise of the mind. Both of these approaches thinks Kant, are mistaken. Empiricism is mistaken because, although experience
may be the occasion of our acquiring knowledge, it cannot be the
sole source of knowledge because pure experience (if there could besuch a thing) would be completely uninterpretable.