The difficulty with trying to understand their beliefs is, they’re not coherent at all. Their ‘beliefs’ differ from person to person and they’re highly fluid, meaning they can flick from one thing to the next without any coherent reason or logic to it.
It’s very difficult to discern a structure or a solid foundation even when the entire belief structure looks to be stuck between different dimensions of insanity.
The belief is the solid structure. It’s science, almost: instead of taking experimental results, and work out a theory to explain it, you take what should be true, and therefore must be true, and therefore is true, and work out something, anything, to prop it up.
The difficulty with trying to understand their beliefs is, they’re not coherent at all. Their ‘beliefs’ differ from person to person and they’re highly fluid, meaning they can flick from one thing to the next without any coherent reason or logic to it.
It’s very difficult to discern a structure or a solid foundation even when the entire belief structure looks to be stuck between different dimensions of insanity.
The belief is the solid structure. It’s science, almost: instead of taking experimental results, and work out a theory to explain it, you take what should be true, and therefore must be true, and therefore is true, and work out something, anything, to prop it up.
I think that’s more the function of the belief rather than the belief itself, but you’re not wrong.