Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It's even worse than that. I went to a evolution vs creationism debate once when I was in college (it was put on for the students there). Everyone in that auditorium was an atheist and everyone was a young earth creationist. The difference was in which speaker had just made a really good sounding point.

The people on the extremes each believe that their side won but as far as I could tell all the people in the middle believed in both as they crossed some "sufficiently cool" threshold.




Everyone was a creationist AND everyone was an atheist? It's a little unclear what that sentence was supposed to say.


What it sounds like is that the person relating the tale mistook cheering for a particular line delivered in a debate performance with agreement (even if momentary) with the broader position it meant to advance.


You understood my statement.

Also, seriously? This is just a smart sounding way to say that you think I'm dumb and that whatever is in your mind is the real truth.

If you're going to put words in my mouth at least be charitable enough to disagree with me before or after your translation.


> You understood my statement.

Well, I have and stated a tentative understanding, but if I correctly understand your present response you seem to disagree with it. So...maybe not?

> Also, seriously? This is just a smart sounding way to say that you think I'm dumb and that whatever is in your mind is the real truth.

No, there’s a difference between “your description sounds like you probably mistook X for Y” and “you are dumb”. Obviously, its a disagreement about the part of the description that seems to report an interpretation rather than observable facts.

> If you're going to put words in my mouth

I didn’t put words in your mouth.

> at least be charitable enough to disagree with me before or after your translation.

“sounds like ... mistook <thing> for <other thing>” is explicitly both a report of a tentative understanding of what you were trying to say and a disagreement with it, along with a specific alternate interpretation. So, inasmuch as I should have disagreed with you...I did.


Hi Verdex, I read your comment and don't understand what you meant either.


I think it's fine, opinions area fluid, there's little inherent truth.

Atheist too because it s the most likely, but I dont feel bad an unprovable fallacy gets some traction: after all maybe a loving designer is looking at me while I pooptype this.

The US gains more raising credit card consuming drones than revolutionary philosophers




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: