| >> | No.41296275
>>41296169
Scaruffi makes a ridiculous claim, and the logical assumption is that it is not true. This assumption gains credibility because of the lack of evidence to suggest that the claim is true, even when directly asked for it. You respond by saying "but we cannot know without evidence!" It is an assumption. Our world is based upon the assumption that things are true, and these assumptions are supported by evidence that in itself requires the assumption that it is true.
Following your line of logic, you can not demand evidence because evidence in itself is based on assumptions. This demand for evidence is made even more ridiculous because it is asking to prove a negative. Negatives are assumed to be incorrect until proven (read: supported by other assumptions) otherwise. Within your subjective reality, evidence can not exist. You project this subjective reality as your objective reality. However, objective reality requires assumptions, which means this objective reality is a direct contradiction to your subjective reality.
There are more things to be said about your considerations about "believing", its relation to assumptions and subjective/objective reality, even institutionalization is relevant here, but I'm not going to summarize an entire university class.
|