(January 31, 2010 at 11:38 pm)TruthWorthy Wrote: There are some minor details which should be addressed here, since some of the argument seems not to correspond with the content.
You use the word test instead of compare, etc. Tests aren't performed through rationalisation, you learn through tests but you hypothesize through mental functions.
Something else which isn't consistent in what you assert, that belief contributes to evidence, completely contradictory to your agreement of thoughts only pertaining within their own properties.
fr0d0 Wrote:'Compare' doesn't seem accurate. 'Challenge' maybe. I not only 'hypothesize' I actually conclude. Not many times could you rationalise equally for or against anything, concluding a draw. I learn and then apply that learning to other ideas... and may draw new conclusions.Challenge might be too strong a word regarding rationalisation as well. You might decide on one perspective over another and this becomes your conclusion. The process used in determining your final belief is not testing and the only real challenge is against perspective.
fr0d0 Wrote:I don't understand what you're saying in the 3rd paragraph. My belief is in something which, if believed, is evidenced. The evidence isn't proof. And my rationalisation isn't without physical manifestation.Your interpretation of events is where you see the evidence. Nothing more.
Coming soon: Banner image-link to new anti-islam forum.