Comment: Stefan is evasive and employs

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Is this it? (see in situ)

Stefan is evasive and employs

Stefan is evasive and employs loaded and leading language. Talking with someone who is that way is difficult. I listened up to minute 42 to where Stefan said the Hatfields and McCoys would need a arbiter, a third party, for their disputes with each other. No, they wouldn't need an arbiter. Their problems are their problems, no one else's. Why Stefan would want to make social their problems confuses me, unless their problems affect people besides them at which point the people who are affected would defend themselves how they see fit, still keeping the conflict in its context: to themselves.

I'm confused why Stefan downplays experience alone and experience with theory, theory being something I value highly and I believe can be talked about in isolation when appropriate. Additionally, I'm confused why he wants to commercialize aspects of life such as court systems when it, commercialization, would produce might makes right, meaning that if the arbiter takes a side, creating a conflict that was 1 to 1 into 2 to 1, the side without the arbiter is beat.

Stefan would do well to drop his evasion and language play such as leading and loaded language, two languages that comprise passive aggressive behavior in attempt to present the person on the other side of the debate as insipid. This debate reminded me why I haven't listen to Stefan in a long time and only a few times overall. His personality begs for (self) improvement.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton