(January 28, 2010 at 9:11 pm)TruthWorthy Wrote: How do you test something through rationalisation?
(January 29, 2010 at 5:50 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Well you arrive at conclusions by weighing up conflicting information right?This is rationalisation, reasoning rationally and being sensible about drawing conclusions.
(January 29, 2010 at 5:50 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: To test your conclusions you seek out contradictory ideas to see if your current conclusions stand firm.Obtaining contradictory argument while attempting to validate any theory is not testing. Often the contradictory arguments against a theory are the results of other's actual tests and not based on subjective reasoning what so ever; the inference is in the data collected and is always presented as so.
(January 29, 2010 at 5:50 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: If they don't, you change your mind and adopt the more rational position. i don't know how it's possible not to.Yes, something I can agree with for the most part. In the way I don't agree with your statement is where irrational beliefs are held onto for emotional, sentimental, etc reasons and where these irrationally held beliefs adversely affect change in perception, attitudes, etc.
(January 29, 2010 at 5:50 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Could any person lie to themselves to the extent they would 'be' something contrary to their logical conclusions? I can't see how.A person might believe they're logic is sound and fail to recognise that it isn't. As you might be aware, when you're operating from within a context it is very difficult/impossible to obtain a trully objective point of view of that context. This is simply because you're in it (similar to not being able to see the forest for the trees). Also, while something might be correct to a certain context it wont be correct outside of that context.
Coming soon: Banner image-link to new anti-islam forum.