Quote:
Originally Posted by Doonge
We have all our flaws. I don't think what you meant was crystal clear in your head at the start of the topic, but that's not a flaw. Discussions, even pedantic ones, are there to sometimes have some fun and clear the air. Win win.
But it's silly to think your articles prove that no one could possibly be immune to their influence.
|
Oh for the love of idiocy.
DiapDealer has very consistently stated that
he himself does not find covers to be an influencing factor, and once you started attacking him about it, tried several times to clarify to you, that he is not and never was saying
everyone else does not find covers to be an influencing factor.
Give it a rest. The entire thread has gone downhill in quality ever since you started nitpicking his words.
Which is hard, because there wasn't much substance in the OP to begin with.
Quote:
|
I don't think DiapDealer need defending, and you are not convincing me (even if you bring some very good points, I think they are overall unrelated).
|
... which would be because he (DiapDealer) was right, and in a way that
cannot be argued with. Not that that stopped you.
Quote:
|
I do judge people by their looks, as do everyone. I know it sounds bad, but fortunately we don't judge people ONLY by their looks. And as we are aware of it, we can try to compensate. Plus I'm not quantifying how much I judge by looks. Perhaps there's some very visual people as you say (I know you are right), and some less visual, but everyone judge using our senses (and vision remains an important sense for most people). People who are less visual are indeed human aswell, but they remain visual to some extent (unless blind or vision impairment, or perhaps even brain impairment! I work with neuro-opthalmologists ^^).
|
Well, sure. Stimuli are stimuli, and to be completely uninfluenced by something requires it not to exist. Think quantum butterflies.
But that is an extremely unhelpful point to make, and yet more proof that this thread is officially no longer interesting per your involvement in it.
Some stimuli are statistically nonexistent. hey exist on such a small scale, and make so little difference, that they might as well not exist.
And DiapDealer says that is his relationship with covers. And Cinisajoy says that is her relationship with physical looks.
Maybe she is discerning enough to genuinely find peoples' brains more interesting than their faces. Why is that such a foreign idea to you?
(And on that note, I have a somewhat creepy zombie internet stalker who apparently wants my brainzzzzzz. Hi, Cin!
)