Yes, someone could reason from some other premise b while communicating a rationale for premise a, I would not be surprised to find that their communicated conclusion more closely followed from that silent premise b than the communicated premise a.
If it's true that the state and product of evolutionary processes calls human intuition into question that's an agreed fact in evidence to be reasoned from going forward, not against as convenient.
If it's true that the state and product of evolutionary processes calls human intuition into question that's an agreed fact in evidence to be reasoned from going forward, not against as convenient.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
