I have a good example.

The logician: 'here are the demonstrable facts, what conclusion can we draw from them?'
The believer: 'here is the conclusion, what alleged facts can we conjure to justify it?'

---

... abductive, inductive, deductive
are the 3 basic modes of reasoning and
when we fail to discern between them
we are destined to act accordingly ...

... after all, inference demands explicit entails implicit
so, iff what is explicitly posed is true, then what it
necessarily infers or implies must logically be true
as well - if not, then it is incontrovertibly axiomatic
there is something amiss with the explicitly posed ...

... the excruciating irony of incomprehensibility
& self-refutation thus; those oblivious of it become
indispensably the experts in applying it, effectually
revealing the exact opposite of apparent intent
thereby granting the courtesy of instant clarification.

Mice In A Maze-Going In Circles

---

It is as it is - It goes as it goes
If it doesn't go, that's how it goes
If it isn't, then that's how it is

_______________________
I like hu-mans. Really
They do funnee stuffs

They seems to live with the
impression that they is some
sorts of omniscient - you can
then always depend on them
to tells you exactly what your
thoughts and feelings is.

Handy

New!! Improved!! Now With T-Formula!!

---

There is forgiveness. Unfortunately, forgiveness doesn't mean a thing
..... when not applied that is. Therefore, it is I who forgive, publically
those who either dare or will not - for, as it seems, they are not ready
yet, to do so by themselves; out of themselves. I hereby thus, plow
the road; leading the way, for those eager to walk that walk as well.
JVH, July 20, 2010, 2:22