### Agnosticism Argument
| **Variable** | **Definition** |
|:----------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **U** | one (x) can unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on a proposition (y) |
| **K** | one (x) knows why they believe that a proposition (y) is true |
| **W** | one (x) should temporarily withhold the belief that a proposition (y) is true |
| **o** | the interlocutor |
| **r** | the proposition at hand |
P1) If one cannot unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on a proposition, then one does does not know why they believe that a proposition is true.
(∀x∀y(¬Uxy→¬Kxy))
P2) If one does not know why they believe that a proposition is true, then one should temporarily withhold the belief that a proposition is true.
(∀x∀y(¬Kxy→Wxy))
P3) The interlocutor cannot unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on the proposition at hand.
(¬Uor)
C) Therefore, the interlocutor should temporarily withhold the belief that the proposition at hand is true.
(∴Wor)
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(~3Uxy~5~3Kxy)),(~6x~6y(~3Kxy~5Wxy)),(~3Uor)|=(Wor))
## Hashtags
#arguments
#philosophy
#debate