That accounts for the first few payments, but at a certain point it becomes too much.
According to you.
No, that’s my argument.
People need to stop throwing out the word “opinion” as if it invalidates what the other person is saying, as if it were a hack in the discussion’s programming that let you safely ignore someone’s points.
I already said, multiple times, that an opinion can’t be invalid, because it’s based on personal beliefs. If you are the kind of person that thinks the opnions of others are invalid, that’s your problem.
Opinions aren’t ultimately based on anything except personal preference, so they aren’t arguable. We are arguing about judgements, which are inferences based on facts. There’s a degree of fuzziness there, but the purpose of an argument is to resolve that fuzziness.
But that’s exactly why opinions are arguable. They are based on the way one sees the facts. And the fuzziness can’t be resolved. That’s why neither of us has yet said “oh, yeah, you are right, i was wrong”.
Your band analogy doesn’t apply to this situation, though. I’m not trying to say the Elementalist is the greatest or worst profession. That speaks to a question on “fun,” and fun is largely subjective. I’m saying the Elementalist is somewhat underpowered, which is a claim about objective reality. I may be wrong or I may be right, but you and I can’t both be right if we disagree about this, whereas there’s no conflict if you say you prefer one band while I say I prefer another.
Objective reality? No, it’s a very subjective reality based on personal preference and style. We can both be right, for ourselves. I’m right for me and you are right for you. This is exactly what makes it personal and subjective. If you don’t lke my example, substitute it with a football team. Then think about how often people argue about those(to the point of physical balance).
For starters, “some people disagree with you, so obviously you’re wrong” is not a valid argument.
How about the actual argument of “obviously you are not stating the ultimate objective truth based on the ultimate hard facts if there are people who disagree with you?”
But, again, my preferences are not the topic of the discussion. What I like (subjective question, about me) is wholly irrelevant to the question of whether the Elementalist is underpowered (objective question, about a digital object written in 1s and 0s).
I have already asked you nicely to please cease this line of discussion. It’s insulting, rude, off-topic, and fallacious. I’m not claiming to be an authority on Elementalists, I’m just trying to present arguments. At best, you’re telling me I suck and my ego is out of control, neither of which is an acceptable thing to say in a polite discussion. To go back to the band analogy, it’s like I said I like the Beatles but think they were better with Pete Best, and you respond by telling me that maybe I should just listen to another band then because obviously the Beatles just aren’t for me. (That’s a random example, by the way. I have no preference for Pete Best one way or the other.) Or, maybe I express annoyance that my hypothetical significant other leaves her purse in weird places and you tell me to dump her and get someone else.
To be clear, because apparently it is necessary to go on record, I enjoy the Elementalist profession. I think it’s fundamentally well-designed and cohesive. It mostly just needs numbers tweaks to be on par with the other professions (and everyone needs work to become perfect from par, but that’s neither here nor there).
After reading this, yeah, your ego is out of control since you seem to believe that if you are not good at everything you “suck” and if smb dares say you a certain activity is not for you, you take it as in insult, because you see yorself as the image of perfection and the mere thought of you having a flaw is insulting. And since one can never win against pride or even have a normal discussion with pride….I’m done.
(edited by TWMagimay.9057)