[imported_luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
I like to think I'm honest so if I discover the position is unsupported I will tend to abandon it (this can be a painful process).

[/ QUOTE ] The pain is correlated to the amount of shifting it causes in any broad-ranging assumptions. I have difficulty thinking in terms of 'positions' ( an normally concieved), even though I realize I must translate my thinking into those terms to have any hope of communicating with 73% of the population. I detest examples because it's impossible for them to convey all the implications of the general principles underlying them. A 'position' is just a single point where the forces exerted from general principles and current variables intersect. [ QUOTE ]
I have an intuitive feel that B is true so I boldly state that B is true and then try to justify it/defend it against all comers. (Isn't that what your doing with this thread?)

[/ QUOTE ] At least related, I'd say. Usually I don't care where stating the position leads and my 'defense' is more of the integrity of the 'position' so the examination has value, rather than actually defending it as 'true'. Typically, when the examination is over I'll notice new more interesting intersections and move on.
I have very few premises that I treat as true ( regardless if they are or not) that I've settled on over time. a) there is an external reality. b) I have free will. and I've slowly moved into accepting c) there is a correlation between my perceptions and external reality, strongly supported by the evidence of evolution.
I spent so much time getting comfortable with those that I don't bother with most discussions about them ( the other person likely doesn't have their gold watch in those areas, let them do their own work).
Does any of the above seem familar to you?