[Filo]

If you didn’t read the whole thing, then you’ve got your own “answer firmly in mind beforehand.” Based on your own argument, I think I’ll reject your reasoning “without consideration.”

You're free to do so, but your conclusion was not based on reason. Mine was.

The fact that I was able to determine the uselessness of the work from excerpts is a testament to my reasoning skills.

The fact that you'd require a complete reading to judge either way is a testament to yours.

Where I see a pile of poo, quickly determine what it is and avoid it, you'd require an exhaustive analysis to determine that the brown stuff was, in fact, poo.

Bully for you!

[nanetteclaret]

Your conclusion was based on reason? That is a “pile of poo.” You made a judgement based on your your pre-conclusions. You thought it was “religious” therefore you rejected it out-of-hand.

***”The fact that I was able to determine the uselessness of the work from excerpts is a testament to my reasoning skills.”*** What a laugh! Better minds than yours, including St. Thomas Aquinas, have sought the answers to these questions. The fact that you need not read the whole argument to determine your final thoughts on the subject is evidence that you are as narrow-minded as those you ridicule.