Quote:
|
The mere possibility that things exists that transcend our ability to fully understand them by naturalistic observation is absurd to you.
|
You are (once again) wrong in your characterization of me. That things exist which transcend our ability to understand may in fact exist. What I'm saying is if they are inherently unknowable, then they are neither worth discussing nor believing and that you posit one of an infinite number of equally plausible hypothesises is in no by no means intellectually satisfying.