the rationalists speak rationally about the rational
the allusionists speak in allusions about what cannot be said rationally
thus the allusionists seem to talk about a superset of what the rationalists talk about
they even accept the rationalist approach (proof etc) in the part that is rationalist
then why can't the rationalists make the leap?
of course there is the issue of the ego
but the ego has already been broken from the allusionist side
the only answer is that they do accept it but do not publicly admit it
don't we all have something we won't admit publicly?
Like i would say that i went to the prostitutes
"i went to the prostitutes you guys!"
"man you need help"
the allusionists speak in allusions about what cannot be said rationally
thus the allusionists seem to talk about a superset of what the rationalists talk about
they even accept the rationalist approach (proof etc) in the part that is rationalist
then why can't the rationalists make the leap?
of course there is the issue of the ego
but the ego has already been broken from the allusionist side
the only answer is that they do accept it but do not publicly admit it
don't we all have something we won't admit publicly?
Like i would say that i went to the prostitutes
"i went to the prostitutes you guys!"
"man you need help"
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου