>Then by definition, the conclusion cannot be as important as the reasoning...
Definition of which one?
I fail to see your logic here.
Premise: The conclusion cannot exist without reasoing
Conclusion: The reasoning is more important than answer
Is there an unstated premise?
When I use reasoning to find an answer to a problem, my goal is to find the answer. The answer cannot exist without the reasoning, true, but if I have reasoning and no answer I didn't achieve what I set out to do because it is impossible to present my answer. I see no reason to deem one more or less important than the other, and I can only assume that there is no difference in the importance of their existence in the process.
Previous
Next
Reply
View the map of this thread
View the map of this thread starting from this message only
View all messages of this thread
View all messages of this thread starting from this message only