It could also be that either side of these debates are unknowingly using abductive reasoning for how they feel about a stance that conflicts. Perhaps the propos

It could also be that either side of these debates are unknowingly using abductive reasoning for how they feel about a stance that conflicts. Perhaps the proposed axioms come after to explain how people feel about controversial issues. Funny enough, this conversation could also be a form of abductive reasoning. We're inferring that people are using abductive reasoning because people often hold conflicting moral views, though using abductive reasoning wouldn't necessarily guarantee conflicting views.