4 ms·
Hmm... The post you responded to - and you quoted - said : "You can never truly arrive at or trust your own beliefs if you can't completely understand and arti
by peterashford 3y ago
Hmm... The post you responded to - and you quoted - said :
"You can never truly arrive at or trust your own beliefs if you can't completely understand and articulate the best possible case against them. In order to do that, you must put yourself in the position of one who believes the opposite of what you do."
It seems to me that your post doesn't make the point you think it does and you ascribe a viewpoint to the post you're responding to which is not in evidence.
- SiempreViernes 3y agoI'm not sure what you are saying, you think that post was talking of "beliefs" in the sense "opinions about pure fiction"? I'll also state here that for me "beliefs" about anything except fiction will by definition have the last turtle rest on the firmament of empirical reality. Anyway, that seems a distinct debate from the one you opened with, that you were trained according to: > Students were paired off and given a biblical passage to examine, say, Jonah and the whale. One student would have to defend Jonah while the other defended, basically, God. After ten minutes, the teacher would say "switch" and they would have to defend the opposite side with equal logic and vigor. This was the making of a mind.