The integration of philosophies (an analogy)

Allow me to compare Truth as a GP essay.

-In a GP essay, we intend to make our views as truthful as possible.
-So how do we do it? we write an Argumentative essay.
-The first thing we do is acknowledge the topic (address the Truth)
-Then we proceed immediately to state our stand (our beliefs about the Truth)
-We know that the stand alone has no backing and highly fallacious. (our beliefs are incomplete representations of the Truth)
-So we back up our stand with arguments
-Our arguments are logical.
-In the end of the paragraph, we conclude our stand with arguments (integrate belief and logic)
-Then we refine the arguments and beliefs next time to attempt understand the topic (Truth) better.

Logic without beliefs is like an argumentative essay without a stand. We could term that kind of essay as expository essays- but note that we do not use expository essays to deal with GP and university papers (in fact, we do away with it after O levels)

Beliefs without logic are argumentative essays without arguments- it's highly fallable to do that.

For logic gave belief reason, and belief gave logic orientation. Without reason, our beliefs can never be defined or given credit. Without orientation, our logic never comes to a conclusion. It is only by the integration of both (the philosophy of science and religion), can we truly start defining the Truth as it is- and of course, come up with a better explanation for the world we know of today (The topic)

With this, I hereby conclude my discussion on the Topic of Truth. I thank you once again for reading and sharing your opinions. I'll move on now the The Moderation Doctrine (applications of logic and belief into our lives), but nevertheless this topic of Truth is still open for discussion at anytime.

Happy CNY =)