>>/6951/
now, of all the things that you have posted over here, while your thesis and my observations can be quite arguable... there is something that I have found much more concerning than the answers related to your vision. Like the first two thirds of your post were correct but from there onwards... I am still quite shocked that you have wanted to take a nosedive from there until the very end: 

It has caught me completely off guard, I will admit, and it is:

> That's not irony at all, let alone the greatest irony.
> Stop it. You do not have any paradoxes in your life. By definition a paradox is a logically impossible situation. for the record, I'm aware that paradox has additional definitions, but the additional uses of paradox apply to situations that are not paradoxes at all and practically make the word meaningless in every context
> Using words you don't know the meaning of is the pinnacle of pretension.
> And Irony is you trying to explain what you meant and PROVING that you're pretentious.
> I think the word you're looking for is ACCURATE.

now, I know that you were tired and that you have considered that I was trying to discourage you without giving you much background history before. It´s true that I jumped onto your thesis without letting you much space like  >>/6960/ has pointed out. 

In exchange, I am letting you to have a time in order to see your own post calmly, read it again with all the time that you need and reconsider what you have stated... because in the figurative sense (for a debate), if I had to illustrate what has happened with these words of yours has gone like this:

What you have done here is that you held a 44.Magnum, you gave it to me with the magazine loaded, without the safe mode and you left it in my hand in a position where I only have to use my finger to pull the trigger (without doing anything coming from my part). On top of that, you are begging to me to shoot at your head and the other two  >>/6955/ and especially  >>/6952/ have predicted the possible terrible fate by offering to you a couple of lifesavers before I do anything.

It blows my mind how in a fairly reasonable post, you have decided to throw it all away in the semantics department (with very few lines which is outstanding to say the least) and I seriously don´t want to do this. The other posts will  sound like a joke if you decide to stay convinced with your own assessment by resorting to this argument alone.

I am not saying this because I am offended (far from it even, I don´t care about what you think about me honestly, I said it here  >>/6948/) but in terms of a debate, you aren´t exactly in a very convenient position to be honest. 

I seriously recommend that you analyze what you have just posted over here (with a laid back manner, don´t rush the answer) and see how it can possibly pan out by exposing that alone but don´t stay there because right now, the results could backfire dramatically on you.