> Or if no one can define or agree on the definition those subjects should just be ignored by everyone? Don't see why we can't have multiple mutually exclusive

> Or if no one can define or agree on the definition those subjects should just be ignored by everyone? Don't see why we can't have multiple mutually exclusive definitions, as long as they are clearly defined, then we can have different lines of argument - kind of like with geometry and the parallel postulate; and which one reality matches is a separate issue we can independently investigate. > Maybe they can and maybe they can't, I guess that depends on the individual. But you ussually do need to think in certain ways which are likely to not be very familiar to some people whose only background is in exact sciences. I'm curious as to exactly how the thinking is different. An example would be nice.