And this is why bsengstock20 is, deep down, holding to the same mindset as any religious person.
They have a strong emotional dislike of the way reality presents itself to them and so they reject it as it really is and, using leaps of faith, claim that it is not the true face of reality. They claim that there is a better, higher, greater and more emotionally satisfying reality. The usual pathways they use to actualise this better reality in their minds are ancient religious texts. But even if you replace these texts with modal logic and metaphysics, the mindf**k still works.
And the deep-seated emotional cause of it is still the same.
Which might go some way Goml, to explaining why bsengstock20 could never bring himself to address our criticisms of his choice of axioms. Just as a devout Christian or Muslim can never openly admit that the Bible or the Quran contradict themselves and are contradicted by physical evidence. It means too much to them to face up to the cold, hard reality.
So, for all his claims and posturing about ultimate reason and ultimate rationality bsengstock20 was reacting emotionally to our questions and challenges. It’s even possible that we saw some kind of emotional defence mechanism at work in his replies. The closer we got to bringing him to some kind of crisis point, the more esoteric and obscure became his language. As if he were reinforcing the security of what he loved by throwing up new walls of impenetrably arcane verbiage.
I’m basing this line of argument on something that slipped past his defences, btw. Three days ago this went between us…
Very well… I’ll try to strip the term of esotericism…
See that?
It’s a dual admission that his replies are couched in esoteric terms AND that he can make the effort to strip all of that away and reply in plainer language if he chooses to. So, he’s known what he was doing all along. I rest my case.
Thank you,
Walter.