Armillary sphere
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (37)
sorted by:
Artificial, anti-nature "instead of".
Nature implies "As well as".
The natural way is "inspiration AS WELL AS reasoning against one another". One can do "imply" and "reasoning".
You are already tempted by your worldview, to ignore resisting the temptation to believe that "reason and implication conflict." They don't.
u/free-will-of-choice ignores the natural, PERCIEVABLE knowledge that there is no conflict between implication and reason.
It is based on ignorance of the fact that resisting admission and denial is resisting nature. Resisting those two is resisting growth. People admit and deny things regularly, because nature makes them do that. Your resistance to nature (reason) implies that your worldview is artificial.
Just accept the NATURAL way of admission and denial.
Adapt to the percivable origin, then. It is PERCIEVABLE that Reasoning and Implication DON'T contradict. You have been TEMPTED into an ARTIFICIAL, ANTI-NATURE thing , reason and implication supposedly "contradicting".
Artificial tells you "Reason and implication contradict". Nature implies that those two don't.
Living within what or where?
Believing that "Reason and implication contradict." corrupts ones self discernment. Believing that "Reason corrupts." is what corrupts ones self discernment.
a) Nature WAS perceivable before one can suggest what IS.
b) Only nature does...implication allows one to redo self; while reason tempts one to redo another in.
c) Well implies each ones will...as implies "as it where" aka as all was before each ones will comes into being.
The issue is using "as well as" to draw comparisons between implication and reason, while ignoring that reason draws together, while implication sets apart.