Chelsea messageboard on 25th may 3646

It is soon to be your version of right aswell!

Mwhahahaha ;-)

Everything? Even the result?

But the game rarely if ever stays constrained within "the rules". So the result is imperfect and as such is no better than one of Plato's shadows.

I have studied no philosphy in depth. Partly because it seems the deeper you get in the less relevance it has in day to day life. And in my expeience of other people who are well versed in philosphy it often turns into a technical game which has little to do with what was originaly being discused.

Who was it who said that most philosopy rarely makes it out of the philophers study? Perhaps he should have added that it is often better kept that way? I mean your arguing about subjectivity and objectivity has done nothing to progress or explore the original subject has it?

You mean you have had your head down there for so long and not found out? I'd sugest you open your eyes and have a look. ;-)

Some are more constrained that others, but no doubt in a relativist universe we are all equaly flawed. There are no shades of grey, only grey!

So you put forward an idea for which you knew there is serious doubt? And you did so without pointing out these doubts? And you didnt have a qualifer about your opinion being subjective?

Tut tut Dan, you wouldn't have been pleased if I did that.

You believe the ideas you put forward here to be true dont you? If there realy is no such thing as truth your ideas can not be true and as such I should discount everything you say.

That someone like you will intentionaly misinterpret a phrase so as to try and win a point? That internet philosphers willfully cheat and as such nothing they say can be trusted?

I supose that's not realy what you meant, was it Dan? ;-)

So you do admit that the truth about a game is more than the result? (However inaccessible it may be.)

I'll have a chilli burger with fries, thanks ;-)