...
In my Notebooks, 15 June 2000, I say that:
| Panel |
|---|
| Wiki Markup |
|---|
_"._.. there is really only one such religious or \ [philosophical\] argument \ [_sc_. for a particular religion or world view\] _\-\- to the effect that we exist humanly at all only because we at least implicitly believe in this particular religion or world view and that, as a consequence, we must also believe it explicitly if our explicit \ [understanding of existence\] is to be both complete and consistent._ Otherwise put: the only really essential 'proof' of any particular religion or world view is to _show that any and all of us are selves at all only because we at least implicitly believe in it and that, as a consequence, our faith must also become explicit lest the inventory of our explicit beliefs be either incomplete or inconsistent"_ (italics added).
|
To take account of my subsequent reflections on what should and should not be said about a religion's being believed "implicitly," the two italicized passages should be rewritten respectively as follows:
...
