Theological Opinions , PART II

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

Then would "I agree with hectorberlioz" necessitate an opinion that hectorberlioz is true? Be still my heart.

Maybe "correct" is the word we're looking for.

That's purely sophistical. You are using agree in a different manner; you cannot both agree or disagree with a person and an idea in the same way. To agree with an idea means you think it is true. To agree with a person means you think they are correct; that is, that they idea in the particular matter is true.

I've been thinking about this, and it occurs to me that we're kind of stranded at the basis of geometry. Euclidian geometry has postulates that Lobachevskian geometry doesn't use. They equally are 'true', but you can't use one to prove or disprove the other.

For the record, I love Euclidean geometry.

Likewise, we're unlikely to get anywhere attempting to prove or disprove issues like the age of creation without shared postulates.

I absolutely agree. I think it's vital to find common principles in an argument before one proceeds; to not follow this order is, quite frankly, foolish.