[reasonisfaith]

Very nice.

Now I would like, if I may, to clarify that you understand the analogy of the father setting rules for his son. The age of the boy doesn’t matter—the fact is there is a significant period of time when children have to trust their parent’s judgment. During this time, the children don’t have all the facts or reasoning that their parents have, but they know their parents are both factually and morally justified.

So the point, described in the abstract, is that a lesser mind does not require full access to the contents of a greater mind in order to know the truth of the greater mind’s judgment.

[kosta50]

During this time, the children don’t have all the facts or reasoning that their parents have, but they know their parents are both factually and morally justified

Don't be silly. How does a child know that his father is "factually and morally justified"? The father could be a drug dealer or a saint, and the child would not know the difference.

[kosta50]

So the point, described in the abstract, is that a lesser mind does not require full access to the contents of a greater mind in order to know the truth of the greater mind’s judgment

Nope, he doesn't know the "truth" of the greater mind's judgment. He has no way of knowing whether that judgment is "true" or "false".