[vektor]

Yeah I see what you mean. I tend to try to look at disagreements purely from an objective and empirical methodology but sure, in reality if hate and anger can be avoided talking about hypotheticals has some value. The problem to me is that people will invent hypotheticals based on a deep-seeded misconception that isn't being communicated so you end up arguing with someone about something they have no intention of ever thinking critically about.

Maybe I misinterpreted his post but it was just one of those ones that seemed to come from that place where counterpoint won't generate any critical thought. It just hits that barrier of "no, I know you're wrong" and no statistic or logical rebuttal even enters the foray of analysis for logical reasoning. The result being a neverending loop of hypothetical scenarios. That being said this is the only forum I've ever been on where people can go more than a page without hurling hateful remarks at eachother.