Reply to thread

Mmm...might want to be careful with the phrasing of such: it smacks of valuing philosophy arguments.


What I mean is that calling something useless because it is unintelligible (for the most part) or directly engages with a very exclusive population is dangerously close to saying something like "epistemology is hard. Therefore we should assume things."


To me, some texts in apologetics that do just this- take for granted (a priori) some fundamental axioms, are the ones that end up being less useful on net because in the end it defeats its own purpose.


Back
Top