The Case of Belief

In the intellectual world of arguing and sharing points of view, people may become concerned about belief. They may ask or presume that if one argues a point, one necessarily believes it. I, taking cue from Terrence McKenna (at times, when being consistent), say that I like to argue the case of whether or not X is true, good, just, etc. But, to argue the case for or against, does not imply belief. It’s more of a functional term relating to the facts of the situation itself- devoid of the personal. In this sense, it becomes more like a game: we argue by comparing and contrasting cases. This does not involve the personality of the persons involved, which means their belief systems. It is true that their personalities affect how they argue/discuss, but it does not become a factor in the how they consciously evaluate the given cases. This way, we discuss and argue to our hearts content, without the worry of believing anything, as that does not apply to the game of comparing and contrasting the cases for things.