 |
 |
||||
|
|
||||
Zhou Tai An (kain@pacific.net.sg)
Sat, 4 Nov 2000 22:56:03 +0800 (SGT)
>> Lots of stuff that people debate about on MLs, to my knowledgeable, can
>> never be proven. ^_^ It's just fun to talk about. I learn your views, you
>> learn mine, and we both share our combined knowledge of the Gundam
>universe.
>> It's not about who "wins" or "loses", at least not to my mind.
>
> But when they ask for opinion, they listen (most of the time ^_^) and
>try for a comeback comment, unlike some of the discussion I have seen
>recently, where people simply refuse to even discuss the "evidence" yet
>insist on being shown even more evidence. Most of the stuff in Gundam don't
But you have to understand that evidence, just like in court cases, is of
paramount importance. Without evidence, you basically cannot do anything,
because what you say is simply conjecture.
>have easily accessible documentation, so it's hard for people to dig it up.
>When people keep on insisting on seeing "hardcore" evidence and don't even
>discuss the possibility of the "softcore" evidence, it's doomed to fail from
>the start...
Well, not FAIL, perhaps...anyway, I can see where you are coming from. Allow
me to apologize (a bit ^_^) - a lot of my methods of arguing come from the
EVA ML and my friends, both of which are demons when it comes to actually
proving a point. Therefore, I have come to rely on hard evidence as the main
thrust of my arguments, because on the ML and with my friends, if you don't
have any, they tend to dismiss you out of hand. So I'm sorry if I seem a bit
hard-nosed...I will try to be more receptive to points in the future.
>> NTs never had god-like power...they were powerful, but not god-like.
>
> Not for Amuro and Char - they are basically considered God in Gundam
>world - most UC timeline fans would acknowledge that both pilots would be
>tough to beat one on one unless they are against one another...
But that's also because of their piloting skills and not only their NT
abilities. (Arrggh, I'm arguing against myself! ^_^)
>> It's just fun to argue about. If you think I shouldn't, or the moderator
>> feels like I'm cluttering up the list, then I'll stop. It's quite simple.
>^_^
>
> I am not saying you are cluttering up the list, but I am asking you to
>"try" to open up a bit, since I don't think I have seen you trying to argue
>the points other people made much (translation: I don't see you trying to
>"counter argue" or at least discuss some of the points other people have
>made and instead keep on "pouring" out your "evidence". Reminds me of the
>Presidental Debate over here...)
Hey, in my defense, I don't see you responding to my points all the time.
^_^ Usually, you end up miscontruing them (perhaps accidentally) to some
degree. However, I believe I have pointed out why I argue the way I do.
>> Actually, I think the NT theory goes much farther - there is a sense of
>> irony about the fact that NTs, which should be the next step in human
>> evolution, are used as nothing but tools for war. The implications of NTs
>> for the human species and humans reactions towards them are also
>important,
>> and add I feel a great sense of depth to Gundam.
>
> You are wrong, in a way - the irony is that people have been "grabbing"
>and "using" the "side-effect" of Newtype and use it for war instead of using
>the "main" feature of NT to further human evolution. Nobody even want to
That's what I was saying above. Read carefully. ^_^ I'm saying that NTs are
important precisely because of this - their irony adds to the themes and
depth of Gundam.
>know about NT - everybody is either afraid of them or want to use them for
>their own gain. It was one of the reason why Quess behave as she did - she
>want people that understand her, not treat her as enemy or even normal.
Another reason to like Quess...^_^
>> Yes, but you have to keep in mind that I haven't been on this ML as long
>as
>> you people have, so what is accepted fact to you is news to me. All my
>> friends think Char and Amuro are pretty strong NTs, so you can see where
>I'm
>> coming from. I don't think this is like the OJ Simpson case...here, you
>> simply believe one thing and I another, and we are talking about it.
>
> I think you misunderstand me. The point I am trying to make is that
>probably everybody on Earth, even the government, knows that OJ Simpson is
>guilty of murder, yet there is not enough solid evidence to convict him of
>murder. Actually, I probably write it wrong - you are behaving like the
>government court system. Unless we can provide solid evidence, you won't
>convict him. Since there are not real solid evidence, we can never convict
>him. Same case here - to me, at least, it seems that you just "brush" aside
>evidences we pointed out and insist on your own. I just feel that it's a
>losing effort from the start and make it harder and harder for people to
>keep up the effort to even try to convince you...
Okay, that's a valid point. I will check my own arguments in the future to
be sure I don't do this (well, at least not often)
Zhou Tai An (kain@pacific.net.sg)
"There is no one simple truth." - Rune Walsh
-
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 04 2000 - 23:41:50 JST