This thread is hilarious. Seriously. Stop. Go back and read. As I was saying, in addition to some amazing creativity, some of the thoughts here (prolly most of them) have totally been mis-understood and mis-quoted too many times to count. There have been astronomical circular arguments as well. Ex. I am intolerant of your intolerance. I personally love that one! -- Go ahead, you can laugh... it's funny
. It is interesting that those who most frequently accuse others of narrowmindedness (if that's a word) are themselves extremely narrowminded... otherwise why would they care if someone shared their thoughts with them?
Seriously, in all our rambling, there is something to be considered:
Human logic can tell us if the structure of an argument is
valid, it cannot tell us if it is
true. Indeed, an argument can be logically valid and materially false at the same time! Observe the following example.
+ Premise 1: Something which is correct part of the time is better than something which is never correct.
+ Premise 2: A stopped watch is correct twice a day, while a fast or slow watch is never correct.
+ Conclusion: It is better to wear a stopped watch than one that is fast or slow.
The above argument is logically valid but obviously false! While something that is true will always be logically valid, the converse is not the case. In other words, combinations of facts do not always converge to make a complete truth. Unfortunately, few 100% provable and relevant facts have been posted here, but I guess that's the reason we're debating relentlessly. No one here seems to be an authority on all subject matter; very few even seem to know much about the things they wrote about.
Example/FYI/random info blurb: Leechy --Interestingly enough, it is theorized that this infamous "blind spot" (optic disc) you spoke of actually can serve purposes such as enhancing binocular cues. Again, I am certain that won't change your mind on anything, nor will it prove my point... but it's an interesting theory you may want to be aware of none the less.
That being said, I doubt in all this argueing anything productive really truly has come about. I.E. No one believes any differently than he or she had previously. It's not that difficult to understand what's happening here. It's hard to get people to want to listen to your thoughts when you attack them first. In fact, it likely pushes them further to the other extreme. Thinking you'll shove your beliefs (or lack there of) into someone else is possibly the worst logic I've seen, altogether. (myself included). So, again, as a consolation, maybe we can see humor in things such as the poor logic within so many posts seen above.
<[ I can already hear the frenzy of keyboards. Go ahead, I know half a dozen people or more are itching to post a synical or snide remark. I honestly don't know how some people here passed up a chance at stand-up comedy. I think you're making a mistake passing up the opportunity.]>
-- Peace out
