The use of logic in establishing truths

There's the keyword again: "granted". Who granted it?"Taken for granted" doesn't mean one person like Dawn Bertot assumed it. It means there's a consensus.

---

Disclaimer: The above statement is without a doubt, the most LUDICROUS, IDIOTIC AND PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WILLFUL STUPIDITY, THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN OR HEARD.

And that discovery depends on consensus among the discoverers. If Mr. A thinks he's discovered X and Mr. B claims it's Y, where is the "fact"? Facts is facts only as far as people agree that they're facts.You seem to be confusing perceived reality with "real" reality or "absolute" reality. If there is an absolute reality, we can never know what it is. We can only know what we perceive. And our perceptions are more reliable if they agree with the perceptions of others. That's why most of us don't believe it when some perceive dead men talking. The individual perception is trumped by the consensus.

---

Disclaimer: The above statement is without a doubt, the most LUDICROUS, IDIOTIC AND PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WILLFUL STUPIDITY, THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN OR HEARD.

If that was true, you could demonstrate it. But how would you demonstrate it? I still have only my perception of your demonstration. Again, how do you know that dead men can't talk? You have the perception that they don't, but somebody else has the perception that they do.In the end, the synapses firing in your brain are all the "reality" you have. You can't "know" that they have any correspondence with the observable world unless they agree with somebody else's. The more agreement, the more confidence that your perceptions are "real".

---

Disclaimer: The above statement is without a doubt, the most LUDICROUS, IDIOTIC AND PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WILLFUL STUPIDITY, THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN OR HEARD.

Aren't M and m relativistic?

---

Disclaimer: The above statement is without a doubt, the most LUDICROUS, IDIOTIC AND PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WILLFUL STUPIDITY, THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN OR HEARD.

You're mixing terms. A lot of people "take it for granted" that God exists - a lot of them are evolutionists and big-bangists. But, as people are beating their head sgainst the wall trying to explain, that isn't axiomatic even to people who "take it for granted".Taking for granted that God exists in a general sense is not the same as it being axiomatic in a specific sense. Axiomatic (again ) requires an agreement for the purpose of discussion. As far as that goes, I consider myself a minority of one. You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts and you're not entitled to your own axioms.

---

Disclaimer: The above statement is without a doubt, the most LUDICROUS, IDIOTIC AND PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WILLFUL STUPIDITY, THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN OR HEARD.