That's science. I'm more interested in pulling out attitudes and making convincing arguments about their influences & significance.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
Those arguments can be convincing because based on something. They can be wrong. If they can't be, its pseudoscience. Else, science.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JCMaas
Yes, if we define science as addressing any argument which can be right or wrong but I feel this misses the essence.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @JCMaas
That's fine too. Its for the pure interest of seeing how differently people perceive things and the connections they make.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Ok, but only one possible conclusion right? Different people spin different hypotheses. Fun fact and testament to human ingenuity. No more.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JCMaas
The conclusion is that different people spin different hypotheses & other ppl found them interesting to consider & agree or disagree with.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @JCMaas
Have a lot of fun trying to pin down John Milton's Christianity. Many hypotheses but we'll never know & the opinions are what's interesting.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @JCMaas
If we cld invent a search engine for people's lives, we could search an idea of his & get hits for when & where he heard it throughout life
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @JCMaas
We could draw diagrams of all his most strongly-held beliefs & their origins & divide his Christian premises into percentages.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
There'd be a right answer. We can't & I wouldn't be interested if we could. The 'ooh' moments are making connections whether he did or not.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.