6th March 2007, 5:48 PM
I try to make sure I don't make the words I use lead to false conclusions. I've heard some really stupid (well thought out, but fatally flawed) arguments that, when broken down, turn out to be little more than semantic nonsense, like those old "if a tree fell in a forest" sort of things. Call it what you will, it doesn't really matter so long as the definition is held consistantly and agreed upon before hand, and as a rule I tend to allow someone making an argument to define whatever terms they will beforehand, so that if they are inconsistant I can call them on their old definitions.
So they want to call it a strategy/RPG, is that really going to drastically change how it's viewed? Semantics, nothing more. If they DO allow it's label to affect how they view it, it's a logical error.
So they want to call it a strategy/RPG, is that really going to drastically change how it's viewed? Semantics, nothing more. If they DO allow it's label to affect how they view it, it's a logical error.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)