To which I say "give me any two numbers". >It's equivalent to a literary critic saying "you can make a computer do anything"; while computers are incredibly po

To which I say "give me any two numbers". >It's equivalent to a literary critic saying "you can make a computer do anything"; while computers are incredibly powerful, any knowledgable programmer understands that that is not true. There's physical constraints and constraints on our own knowledge. What someone means behind a statement and their motivations behind that statement are a lot more within human constraints. There are no limitations on interpretation. Linguistic interpretation is a lot more open-ended than that and when I say people can make up whatever they like, as long as they have some strands of logic to prop up behind it, I mean it. How many different interpretations of Romeo and Juliet do you think can be found within each scene? Each interpretation will be colored by the observer's experiences. If they are pre-determined to find a certain message, they'll find it. I know this for a fact. Humans see connections, patterns, and meanings that aren't really there. As an example, the puzzle Masqurerade has already been solved. Yet there are people who are so certain that their solution is the correct one. They see patterns that aren't really there, and readily convince themselves of the truth of their solution. Many of the solutions are quite logical, some even give a close answer. The problem is that the puzzle has already been solved. [0] http://hazlitt.net/feature/goes-all-way-queen-puzzle-book-drove-england-madness http://hazlitt.net/feature/goes-all-way-queen-puzzle-book-dr...