For if I were you, I would have given up making persistently bad arguments days ago.

But its all in good fun.

In one single discourse:

You suggested that the objects in metaphors aren't supposed to be "related".

I refuted that.

You then suggested that the dialogue between Vince and Jules and the metric/imperial comparsion has to do with the use of metric system in the criminal underworld.

I completely refuted that.

You are now suggesting that the metric/imperial comparison is about subjective interpretation of reality.

I have already refuted that, and will completely refute it below.

Watch.

>yes cavemen argued about whether or not 100 grams was heavy,
>didn't they?
>no, early man had to make units of weight to help him think,
>then eventually everyone had to be using THE SAME,
>STANDARDIZED units of weight

Lol. What the fuck does this have to do with anything?

At all?

Oh. I'm not supposed to ask that question, because you wouldn't be posting at all if you were to answer it.....keep it moving.....

>yes "light" and "heavy' are still subjective but at least now
>there's a system to put things in perspective

Lol.

Idiot.

No.

No.

No.

You are wrong.

"Light" is totally subjective, and is based on a cognitive-sensory interaction with objects that has nothing to do with the unit of measurement.

"Heavy" is totally subjective, and is also based on a cognitive-sensory interaction with objects that have nothing to do with the unit of measurement.

Me and a 10 year old American kid, who both use the imperial system for common measures like our mass, have completely different ideas of what "heavy" and "light" are, despite the fact that we both use the Imperial system of mass measurement.

Me and a 25 year old Dutch guy, who are the same size, both athletic and work out occassionally, likely have similar SUBJECTIVE understandings of what light and heavy are, despite the fact that we use different standards of measurement for our mass.

You introduced the "metric/imperial = subjective interpretation" argument, and it dosen't stand up to any scrutiny. There is nothing about the dichotomy about "metric/imperial" that speaks to any aspect to the subjective understanding of "tall" and "short" let alone "good" and "evil."

Like I said, the connection was likely manufactured by people like yourself over-exerting yourself in the attempt to extract meaning.

>different laws don't change the actions themselves. smoking
>weed in Amsterdam is exactly the same thing as smoaking weed
>in LA

Cop out #1.

Nice cop out attempt, but you can't sneak that by me, paw.

The subjective understanding of weed-smoking is different to different people, in different places.

What "heavy" and "light" are is different to different people in different places, but has nothing to do with metric/imperial sytem, or geography, or culture. It has to do with how people perceive the masses of objects. How your sensory nervous sytem interacts with your conciousness and object...a neurobiological phenomenon. Not one tied to how one perceives "rightness" and "wrongness."

In fact, the only thing that the US/Holland -- Imperial/Metric connection has in common is that they are......differences. Mere differences don't make a helpful metaphor for moral differences.

>no, because the point about the drug dealer using metric was a
>small, supporting side point in brackets, which i only said
>because I suspected you would say some shit like "but in
>America, where the film is set, they use the Imperial system.
>so how does the metric system have anything to do with the
>story?", and explaining that the reason is because it's
>science related doesn't actually change anything, it doesn't
>make it inconsistent

Lol. You suck.

Cop out attempt #2, caught by OE.

You brought up the "criminal world uses the metric system" because you actually though that was part of the metaphor in the movie. I simply exposed and refuted it. Now you are saying "I said it only in passing."

Why did you decide to say *that* only in passing?

Because you actually believed it was relevant to the metaphor, and I exosed it for the fiction that it was.

>LOL why would you even refute this point. They crashed because
>of a metric/imperial mix up. End of story. I'm not even going
>to bother entertaining there being something "ironic" about it
>being metric or whatever, because it's so fucking irrelevant
>and typical of you

Watch this:

I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever, used the imperial system for any scientific measurement of any kind.

Ever.

And I'm an American.

In fact, I can run into my laboratory, look at every single instrument of measurement I have, of every kind, and I will see not a single trace of imperial measurement. Judging by the scientific instrumentation in the lab in which I work, you wouldn't know whether or not I'm in Europe or America.

Again, you brought this up when discussing your "the criminal underworld uses the metric system." That point was wrong, and I think you know it by now.


>no, in that case i'd be realizing that it is not ESSENTIAL to
>the film
>you're so childish in thinking that just because I don't
>attach absolute importance to something, i must be admitting
>it's wrong

Cop Out #3.

So because your arguments are floundering, you now say "It wasn't ther serious...I'm not attaching absolute importance to it.."

Bullshit.

If it was, the burden of proof lay on you to explain how it was a metaphor. You haven't done that. You've gone from "Its slightly a metaphor" to talking about the "scales of justice" to talking about how "the criminal underworld uses the metric system."

All of those arguments are bad for the outlined reasons.

>no, because in that case he could have talked about any other
>"little difference," like the ones you listed, none of which
>were as good a metaphor as metric/imperial, leaving you only
>the possibility that it's a COINCIDENCE he chose
>metric/imperial, which is not a good argument

Lol. Since when is "coincidence" a bad argument? Even worse than 'coincidence' is the over-arching attempts of yourself and crouch to extract meaning from the very simple.

Or, like I SAID, he likely used the metric/imperial example to merely introduce the discussion..."primers" are what some people call them...they don't have to be full of meaning themselves. If it wasn't that, it was a bad metaphor for morality. I hope by now you can admit the latter.

>and it's so simple
>morality, system for making moral judgements
>imperial/metric, system for making physical judgements
>and physical judgement, particularly weight, is a well known
>metaphor for moral judgement already

No, its no so simple, because you've shaved down your argument because the other ones you have made have been refuted.

You said the metric/imperial comparison was related to the of the metric system in the criminal underworld.

Was that wrong?

Yes.

You said the metaphor was used to highlight how the metric system has gained common usage in the english speaking world.

Is that wrong?

Yes.

In fact, you have rambled on about the imperial/metric system in manners so obtuse that you've ruined whatever semblance of an actual metaphor might have once existed.

>lol, i suspected that's what you'd say for "colder"
>what's even funnier is
>1. what the fuck does being colder have to do with being less
>"relaxed"?

Lol.

I'm glad you asked this. Watch someone really explain a metaphor:

Physiologically, cold temperatures lead to the vasoconstriction of blood vessels. Cold temperatures slow the heart rate. The smooth muscle in your blood vessels are "less relaxed" in colder temperatures.


Damn, I'm nice wit mines.


>2. what the fuck was "narrower"

Your blood vessels literally are narrower in cold temperatures, again, due to vasoconstriction.



But it didn't have to come to this.

You wrote an argumentative check that your intellect can't cash.

You could have been humble from the start. Instead, you made all sorts of enormous leaps, tried bridging concepts that didn't quite have any real connection, and then dug a hole for yourself that you can't quite argue out of.

Perhaps the imperial/metric comparison was meant to communicate something. The problem is, it definatley had nothing to do with the criminal underwold's use of the metric system, it certainly had nothing to do with the increased use of the metric system in the English speaking world, it surely had nothing to do with the "scales of justice." It has nothing to do with any of those things, at all. In fact, people who like Pulp Fiction as much as you do have given me much better, more sensible, spins on that scene than you have.