3 ms·
Well I have no idea what a fugelizer or a fugel or a bryles are, but those are just as good abstract "things" as any other and so I can just as easily fit them
by IIAOPSW 4y ago
Well I have no idea what a fugelizer or a fugel or a bryles are, but those are just as good abstract "things" as any other and so I can just as easily fit them into the pattern of (thing) and (other thing) --(pro existence of)--> (third thing). I can also safely assume that the reason for things existing eventually circuits down to "someone wants it to be this way". So, why would anyone rather their bryles be fugels?
(I can figure out other semantics of how bryles and fugels relate to other things I know about later. I don't need a full map of concept relations before I start connecting up the circuit and seeing what it does).