4 ms·
This is the lamest argument I've seen in a while. It's clearly being presented as a true story by the original source. If it's not true it's not food for any k
by ebbv 8y ago
This is the lamest argument I've seen in a while.
It's clearly being presented as a true story by the original source. If it's not true it's not food for any kind of thought it's just a really badly written and stupid short story. Stop trying to justify lying.
- icebraining 8y agoI sincerely don't get that position. We've been presented with a story; whether that story actually happened in unknowable. So how can it possibly affect the story's quality as food for thought? I'm feeling like Brian: https://youtu.be/9czBBKof7Yo?t=1m30s https://youtu.be/9czBBKof7Yo?t=1m30s
- ebbv 8y agoHow can it possibly have any value whatsoever if it's not real? If it's real you can wonder ok what motivated actual people to behave in this way, what actually happened? If it is made up (which it almost certainly is because it's so far fetched and ridiculous) then it has zero value. There's nothing worth thinking about here or discussing if it didn't actually happen. Like I said it's just a really poorly written short story. You don't discuss literature the same way you discuss journalism. I can't believe you don't already know that?