Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Yesway Jose" data-source="post: 5638006" data-attributes="member: 6679265">I agree with you. AFAICT, the anthropic principle seems to apply to cosmology. IMO, to summon it into a forum discussion about D&amp;D seems, at best, a overbearing way of shutting down an opposing opinion.&nbsp;That is, paying lip service to the idea that another person's subjective opinions are genuine, but then seemingly feeling threatened by the very existence of an opposing opinion in the same room (which I think we can all feel to *some* extent, I know I do on some level, either a little bit or much more), but then attempting to thwart that opinion with blunt semantic instruments (=arguing to &quot;win&quot;) rather than exploring the conflict (=discussing, agreeing to disagree).&nbsp;This is a neutral zone, not a 4E stronghold, and this thread is about a perception of &quot;disassociated mechanics&quot; in 4E. We are allowed to state our preferences with a few paragraphs of reasonable prose and not a goddamn logical thesis. Nor is there any obligation on anyone to spend hours of their free time on a counter thesis if that's not enjoyable. I think: Discuss these opinions on their own terms or go home.&nbsp;Being on the receiving end of a hardnosed argumentative style is not enjoyable whatsoever, and that's going to limit my options with them.&nbsp;In contrast, pemerton's and Crazy Jerome's replies to me are like a breath of fresh air, present excellent points, and I am happy to read their posts, maybe agree with some points, maybe agree to disagree with other points, maybe respond in kind when I have time.&nbsp;IMO, YMMV.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Yesway Jose, post: 5638006, member: 6679265"] I agree with you. AFAICT, the anthropic principle seems to apply to cosmology. IMO, to summon it into a forum discussion about D&D seems, at best, a overbearing way of shutting down an opposing opinion. That is, paying lip service to the idea that another person's subjective opinions are genuine, but then seemingly feeling threatened by the very existence of an opposing opinion in the same room (which I think we can all feel to *some* extent, I know I do on some level, either a little bit or much more), but then attempting to thwart that opinion with blunt semantic instruments (=arguing to "win") rather than exploring the conflict (=discussing, agreeing to disagree). This is a neutral zone, not a 4E stronghold, and this thread is about a perception of "disassociated mechanics" in 4E. We are allowed to state our preferences with a few paragraphs of reasonable prose and not a goddamn logical thesis. Nor is there any obligation on anyone to spend hours of their free time on a counter thesis if that's not enjoyable. I think: Discuss these opinions on their own terms or go home. Being on the receiving end of a hardnosed argumentative style is not enjoyable whatsoever, and that's going to limit my options with them. In contrast, pemerton's and Crazy Jerome's replies to me are like a breath of fresh air, present excellent points, and I am happy to read their posts, maybe agree with some points, maybe agree to disagree with other points, maybe respond in kind when I have time. IMO, YMMV. [/QUOTE]

Verification