Of course; I agree the odds of Maggie even being related to Charlie in some way are very slim indeed. But that wasn't what I was trying to argue.This
is what I was arguing against:
Chance Gardener wrote:Ok, I just have to ask: why do so many folks say there is a tri-mancer link up in play?
Because they are idiots. Really, it's just that simple.
The capacity of the forumites to conjecture that almost anything which has been shown, or not shown, in the comic as being the root cause of just about anything else, well, it defies reason. And no matter how often their conjectures are dispelled, they will continue with their baseless theories. There is no stopping them.
Someone who holds a favorable opinion of that theory, or one of any number of similar 'Epileptic Trees', is not by definition an idiot.
I've already gone over why just bringing up wild ideas is as much if not more a sign of intelligence
as idiocy, but for reference:
Oberon wrote:Take Maggie being Charlie, for example. In this thread this has been speculated on by one person, and accepted by another. If it's true, so much of what we've seen in the story unravels that it'll just suck. And I don't believe the author is going to write a story which ends up in the toilet. So I reject that out of hand. As should any other person.
Ah; so close, but so far... Yes, I (mostly) agree with your line of logic of why the author will probably
not do such a thing. But the correct conclusion is not to reject the possibility
, let alone without first logically refuting it
. The correct response is to reject the probability
: no more, no less.
If and only if you logically prove
that such a thing is not possible
, at the very least within a common set of axioms such as the laws of physics, can you discredit its possibility
. But it's always the logical process
Which is why no one should be called 'stupid' for bringing up an idea, no matter how
far-fetched. If far-fetched ideas are never brought up, they can never be logically disproven and -more importantly- those few far-fetched ideas which do
turn out to be more correct than the leading theories would never be discovered. (Need I give an example? All right: Quantum Physics.)
Oh, and even if they persist in their beliefs after your logically disprove them make sure your axioms match up before calling them an idiot. For instance, in the example you gave someone might disagree with you that Maggie being Charlie would make the story suck. In the absence of that axiom, your entire argument falls apart -in a completely logical and intelligent manner. If you wanted to continue the discussion at that point, you should instead persuade him that the plot holes that would erupt in the presence of such a development would ruin all enjoyment of the story. But even if they still
disagree, "someone of poor taste" would be a better descriptor than "idiot".
I'd like to clarify why I said "so close, yet so far". In my quote of Oberon, he succeeds on the first 90%: he considers the possibility, then creates a logical argument as for why it's unlikely. This is good, following the paradigm of proper logic and reasoning. But then he decides to completely discount any possibility that it could happen at all. This, by extension, discounts the possibility that he missed an important detail that upsets his argument.
As an example, in this particular case the point of contention lies here:
Oberon wrote:If it's true, so much of what we've seen in the story unravels that it'll just suck.
MarbitChow wrote:Every action Maggie has taken since the start of the story makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER if she is also Charlie.
These arguments rely on a completely subjective set of opinions, which can and do vary wildly from person to person.
Even apparent conflicts with established canon are debatable: where one person sees an irreconcilable contradiction, another may think that it makes perfect sense. For instance, Maggie working inside a group apposed to Charlie: I for one question the purpose of a disguise that isn't used to infiltrate the enemy.
Finally, there's the Bias Blind Spot
. Now, having one is no shame: it happens to the best of us (myself included). I'm trying to be tactful here, so I'll leave it at that.