I can’t find them, but I’ve been told there are lots here.
Can anyone point the way?
1 Like
I could swear they were decribed somewhere on the Shroud of Turin or in an article in the prestigious MDPI journal Religions.
Did I miss something? 
I’ve been thinking about this again lately, trying to get at the heart of the problem. Consider the two statements:
A) There is more to the world than we can see with our eyes.
and
B) I feel there is more to the world than we can see with our eyes.
Is one more peaceful than the other? I go back and forth about this, and conclude that it is not so much the statement as the participants in the discussion that make the difference.
Fallacious statements are not peaceful. Even without intending to, the person making the statement is imposing an unfairness on others. Science is inherently contentious, but usually peaceful.
Not sure where I’m going with this.
1 Like
I’d say it depends on whether the person who says it means there to be a distinction. The first seems an expression of uncontestable fact, while the second seems capable of leading to discussion. But context would be helpful in determining intent. As you suggest.
2 Likes
I know that there is more to the world than I can see with my eyes, because I bumped into a bit of it the other day when walking down our hallway when the hall lights were off.
6 Likes
It’s your own fault for not echo-locating!
2 Likes