>>12269087>Honest and/or reasoned people use the word axiom as a building blockI'm not denouncing the use of axiom/assumption whatsoever. In fact, I think they're a great way to introduce a bit more curiosity and mobility into the realm of science as it stands, which has become very rigid.
But axiom gets tossed around like it's baked into empiricism. It convinces you of something without having to say "but this is based on assumption".
It's just a roundabout way to slip in dogma when it's used in this fashion.
If someone is unwilling to unterchangeably utilize axiom and assumption, then I hold the thought that they are either delusioned themselves, or they're intentionally trying to delusion me.
I am happy to voluntarily enter, swim around, and perceive through what is acknowledged as illusion if it's first acknowledged as such, as opposed to "cmon, it's basically concrete" which is what "axiom" generally tend to imply.
