Might we assume you have adopted that position from your idol, Alyssa Rosenbaum? Her philosophy posited that the truth is immutable, cast in stone. Rand expressed this as A is A. Logic would dictate that alphabets would end in Z; and Z is Z. Note that the Greek alphabet end in Omega. The moral and Christian postions you have taken issues on these boards conflicts with the philisophical verities of Ms. Rand's objectivism, ie, the idea that selfishness is good, greed is admirable, and altruism is evil. Unfettered capitalism is the only true moral system in history.

Arguments can be separated into two categories: deductive and inductive. A deductive argument is one in which it is impossible for the premises to be true but the conclusion false. An inductive argument is one in which the premises are supposed to support the conclusion in such a way that if the premises are true, it is improbable that the conclusion would be false. Note improbable, not impossible at the core. Accepted "facts" can be proven wrong, myths can be debunked and often are. One of my personal favorites was the 1964 realization that the scientific world had to change its story on the dinosaur from being a ponderous, cold blooded reptile into a swift, warm blooded being.

FYI, conflicting information and positions exist for all thinking beings. You are correct when you recognize that ideas cannot survive in conflict. F. Hegel named these conflicts thesis and antithesis. When they do come in conflict, by definition neither one can continue to exist so they give rise to something new, called a synthesis. This synthesis becomes the new thesis (which will conflict with its antithesis) and become a new synthesis. This is a description of the evolutionary process of change in conceptual reality.

Understanding the difference between denotation and connotation is important to understanding definitions and how concepts are used. Unfortunately, that is complicated by the fact that these terms can be used in two different ways: grammatical and logical. Even worse, both uses are worth keeping in mind and both uses are relevant to project of logical, critical thinking. Something your myopic, atheistic, Russian-Jew hero glossed over.

'critical thinking' is used, in one form or another, throughout this site - without asking what does it mean? Some may get the impression that it simply involves finding fault with others and others' ideas, but that isn't really the case. As a general rule, critical thinking involves developing some emotional and intellectual distance between yourself and ideas - whether your own or others' - in order to better evaluate their truth, validity, and reasonableness. Being a leading edge Bush apologist is a serious barrier to arriving at any truth.

And, as for poetry being "gas" my suggestion is that you stay away from discussion of the arts, literature, and non-lineal abstract thought. We have seen how your unbridled loyalty to Bush has diverted your political thought process.

Publius