It is unfortunately very likely indeed!
And with the condescension of those who buy this press!
Hoplàh, interesting! However, this is a step that I would not take! Even if Bob's thesis is verifiable.
I see where you're coming from, but why should we jump in the extremism of the idea? ( '
if this is true then the whole press is (would be) rotten. ” etc.).
Isn't this where we face a fallacy without the need for the slightest Boolean logic that would support ... A bit as if the very denunciation of a fact would force by itself to validate de facto all the remains (a supposed thesis without anti-thesis, which would be self-justified ... Who can tumble down on the simple crime of "dirty mouth" if we are not careful, in fact.)?
This reduction mechanism would then make it possible to "
prove yourself right"(or good conscience) anytime, anywhere, in any case, right? I have a family member who's become a bit like that.
If so, I think it's a dangerous approach. There the pathos - hear the paranoid drift - can watch without the knowledge of his own free will, can it, and which can create some misunderstandings in discernment (I say that without any offense, quite the contrary).
It's just a difference in approach that divides us Gegyx, we are not fundamentally in opposition or systematically on all points (if you know what I mean) this is also why you have so much trouble in understand me, if I'm not mistaken!
If it was so simple ...
So yes, when you say that I also applaud, but a little regret with support on the hind legs ...