Credo, quia absurdum est: the implicature

Jones, post, this blog:

"Thinking dogma instead of intolerance, if we use the definition I gave above, "belief beyond reason" (which, incidentally, encompasses religious dogmas nicely).
then it seems reasonable to dispose of them, at least in analytic philosophy if not in religion."

Hear, hear.

Then there's Tertulian. Also to consider:

"I believe it ("Credo"), because ('quia') it is absurd ("absurdum est"). I always loved him for that.

It's so contradictory that the implicature it invites is deafening! (ab-surdum is cognate with 'deaf' in Italian, etc.).

To consider!

I think Dennett has an essay, "Beyond belief!". People tend to overuse (especially in America, from my experience) the word "UN-Believable!". I never heard an American uttering this expression in a way I tolerate it. Because, on considering what the claim was (e.g. that George Clooney didn't get the Oscar), I found it always VERY believable.