in reply to Re^4: [OT] On Validating Email Addresses
in thread On Validating Email Addresses
Derived from a quote by science fiction author Theodore Sturgeon, who once said, "Sure, 90% of science fiction is crud.
Sound's like a variation on Ratner's Gaff
Neither version is a particularly convincing argument.
That doesn't mean that every pervasive meme is correct, however.
Let's see, if I do a quantatative study of the people who claim "the earth is flat", or that "evolution never happened", or that "the earth is no more than 15,000 years old", they would all three likely come out with a single digit percentage for and a ninety something percent against.
Which should I believe?
On the other hand, when I hear and read a phrase that is used in
- British Parliament
- Scottish Parliament
- Canadian Parliament
- Australian parliament
- New Zealand Paliament
- South African Parliament
- US Congress
- US House of Representatives
- The Times Literary Supplement
- The Guardian
- The New York Times
- The Washington Post
- Universities, Law schools, Drama schools, TV, Radio, fiction and non-fictional books, periodicals, and academic papers. Et al. Ad nauseum.
- Fall in line and use the phrase in that manner that is widely used, accepted and understood by the many, at the risk of being sneared at by the few?
- Concern myself with the hypersensitivities of those few that choose to be offended by that "new usage", and cling tooth and nail to an archaic, idiomatic, and illogical interpretation, that is only 'understood' by some small percentage of the population, that claim their interpretation is "the one true meaning"?
Snear on. No contest.
Examine what is said, not who speaks.
Silence betokens consent.
Love the truth but pardon error.
In Section Meditations