I want to live consistently. What does this mean? I believe this means a person has one central paradigm to which everything he does and thinks in life conforms.

I believe there are two fundamental paradigms that one must choose to operate out of, at least for starters.

1. Mental Reasoning. This would be where the beliefs we hold and the choices we make in life are based upon logical deduction and evidential induction. I believe this is principally encapsulated through three principles of knowledge. First, the law of noncontradiction, which states that A cannot be A and non-A in the same sense and at the same time. Second, the basic reliability of the senses. That is, what we taste, touch, hear, feel, and smell can be relied upon as being true to reality for the most part. Third, the analogical use of language, meaning that language has the capability of communicating meaningful ideas that others can understand and process. This paradigm is what much of modern science and medicine is based upon in the west.
2. Gut Instinct. This is a paradigm that is irrational in the sense that it is not based upon rules of logic or evidence. Saying it is irrational does not mean it is inferior or wrong; it just means it does not use these rules as its basis for thought and action. Rather, it is an outworking of feelings, beliefs, ideas, and desires. It does not attempt to give reasons for pursuing a course of action. This paradigm is most prominently seen in Eastern religions and philosophies. It is also noticeable in many Christian groups.

How should one choose which of these paradigms to operate out of? There can be no answer to this question. If someone were to use logic to show why living by mental reasoning was better, this would be committing a logical fallacy called circular reasoning. For by using logic, the person has already chosen to operate out of the first choice and his conclusion is therefore found already to be one of his premises. Someone would also not be able to argue that the second paradigm choice is better, because by doing so the person would be presupposing the first paradigm, and thus not really living in the second at all.

Now, I don’t believe most people operate strictly out of one central paradigm. To put it more plainly, I believe most people live inconsistently. This is not to say that they are wrong or inferior for doing so. It simply means that they do not have one overarching paradigm in which they operate. Some of the things they do and believe are based ultimately on mental reasoning and some of the things they do and believe are based ultimately on gut instinct.

If a person is content to live inconsistently, then this blog post will be of no profit to them. However, most of the people I talk with want to live consistently. They don’t like to feel that they might be living inconsistently. I believe these people need to make a definite choice on which of these two fundamental paradigms they are going to operate out of. This way, even if they are wrong, they will at least have the consolation that they were consistent in what they believed and how they lived their lives.

To use a classic Christian example, most Christians believe the Bible is true. However, they want to base this belief on gut instinct only, but also say that it is rational by claiming scientific and archaeological evidence to support it. But this is inconsistent. I can believe the Bible is true because scientific and archaeological evidence support it. However, if I put it on this plane, I must also be willing to admit it is not true if the evidence later does not support it. Conversely, I can believe the Bible is true just because I feel it is or I want it to be. However, in doing so I must also acknowledge that my belief is irrational, meaning that it is not based on logic and evidence, but simply on personal (or spiritual/supernatural) feelings. I can do either of these, but I cannot do both and be consistent.