Newman
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2017
- Messages
- 3,534
- Likes
- 4,372
Science and facts make one wrong.Look, a vinyl guy being confrontational.
You are supposed to nod sagely when @Newman and old mate make you wrong, display contrition and vow to return henceforth to the one(s and zeroes) and only SoTA path.
It’s a shoot-the-messenger error to make it all about the person bringing hard light to the discussion of soft preferences. And be clear: the hard and the soft do have an area of overlap.
It’s also a diversion tactic. Let’s divert attention away from the science or the facts, and demonise the person who uttered them. Who do they think they are? What right do they have to “make me wrong”? That’s right, let’s talk about the messengers, and how arrogant and mean they are. Much more fun. You’ve been doing it for quite a while, in this thread.
I make a genuine and deliberate effort to only discuss the soft where it overlaps the hard. It’s a legitimate topic on this website. However, the reactions of some here are as if I insisted that all soft is hard. “You’re telling me what I can and can’t like! That’s outrageous, and I’m outraged! Here, let me pour scorn on you for 50 pages!”
I believe that a careful reading of my posts will reveal that I am never making the sort of claims that the outraged attribute to me. If I occasionally do, then I apologise for those mis-steps, but I think in general I am careful not to, because my interest is in the science and facts, including the science and facts that relate to preference.
My concern is that sometimes people are deliberately choosing to misrepresent my statements…the old argumentum ad absurdum. Then shoot the messenger. I consider that to be poor form. The other possibility is that people aren’t reading with care…or maybe with too much emotion…but I find that the less likely explanation, given the generally intelligent audience here.
I’m trusting you to take these comments the right way.
cheers