3 ms·
... but you must be thinking in a different context or have a different set of assumptions to other people, given that it's presumably not obvious if you've had
by EliRivers 8y ago
... but you must be thinking in a different context or have a different set of assumptions to other people, given that it's presumably not obvious if you've had to say it. Here's an opportunity for everyone involved to expand their minds by trying to understand other people's assumptions, axioms and contexts.
- CamperBob2 8y agoThe context is reality. The assumptions are necessarily biased. And the axioms are those of Euclid ("There's only so much space next to the train station") and Pauli ("It's already full.").
- EliRivers 8y agoPerhaps we could build another rail station. This happens where I live. There's a new one being built on an existing line because the number of people living near it is enough to justify a new station. I think you will struggle to convince people here. Your style of argument alienates your audience. Given that any road could be a rail, any arguments about how everyone could have a road near them could presumably be met with the idea of having a rail near them. If you want axioms, I believe that everyone could live near a rail station. It's not physically impossible, despite being impractical and so forth. I find your arguments unconvincing and deliberately patronising, which does not help your case.
- CamperBob2 8y agoGiven that any road could be a rail, any arguments about how everyone could have a road near them could presumably be met with the idea of having a rail near them. Ridiculous and incoherent. Your style of argument alienates your audience. As does your insistence on mass behavior modification, I'm sure.