Are people afraid to post the results or something? It states in the OP to provide all relevant information, which includes what your tensions are. How can we analyze whether it has merit unless we know what it is and why you disagree or agree? Without the information, there is no discussion. Not hard.
I've read this explanation like 5 times and I still have no idea where the contradiction exactly is. I mean the first one said no evidence -> unreasonable and the second one no prove -> faith
" Philosophical Health Check - Analysis 2 The Philosophical Health Test has identified the following tension(s) in your beliefs: Statements 17 and 28: Are there any absolute truths? 37% of the people who have completed this activity have this tension in their beliefs. You agreed that: There are no objective truths about matters of fact; 'truth' is always relative to particular cultures and individuals And also that: The holocaust is an historical reality, taking place more or less as the history books report If truth is relative then nothing is straightforwardly 'true' or 'factual'. Everything is 'true for someone' or 'a fact for them'. What then, of the holocaust? Is it true that millions of Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and other 'enemies' of the Third Reich were systematically executed by the Nazis? If you believe that there are no objective truths, you have to say that there is no straight answer to this question. For some people, the holocaust is a fact, for others, it is not. So what can you say to those who deny it is a fact? Are they not as entitled to their view as you are to yours? How can one both assert the reality of the holocaust and deny that there is a single truth about it? Resolving this intellectual tension is a real challenge." Ridiculous... As if the concept of truth is the same as the concept of reality. Sorry I can't take this test seriously. Look out for american pragmatism. Best regards from Rorty.