Problem is when someone starts at the conclusion and works backwards.
Yeah, you can end up with a rationale for the conclusion, but then you do it twice, three times, four times, and eventually you've got an entire inconsistent binder filled with incompatible rationalizations because they aren't based on building a consistent worldview, they're based on justifying the thing of the moment.
Yeah, you can end up with a rationale for the conclusion, but then you do it twice, three times, four times, and eventually you've got an entire inconsistent binder filled with incompatible rationalizations because they aren't based on building a consistent worldview, they're based on justifying the thing of the moment.
- replies
- 0
- announces
- 0
- likes
- 1