[EVA] Rei and the glass of water

[Gareth Ortiz]

 heles wrote:

>> >Proved facts could be true or false, real or unreal.

>Ehr...was I saying the contrary? Or, did I give you the impression that I
>was saying the contrary? I was not. ^_^

My deepest apologies.  My statement still stands of course, but it is no
longer aimed at you. *bow*  When you wrote "real or unreal," I thought you
might have meant "reality" (RL) and fiction.  Obviously, you did not.
Once again, I apologize for the misunderstanding on my part.

>that, IRL (="in real life", right?), some facts can be proved, and facts
>that can be proved could be either true or false, real or unreal.

Yeah, that's what it stands for.  And yes, I agree completely in this
respect.

>Gainax, thus it works differently from theirs. I find it quite legitimate
>for me to construct an Evangelion-based imaginary world in my head,
>modifying it as I like it most.

Sure, that's what fanfics are, after all.  OTOH, a person should know
better than to bring what their imagination conceived directly against an
established fact in an argument.  It's simply a matter of validity.  In
that case there is a definite "right" and "wrong," and the person who is
presenting the fact rather than his own interpretation is correct...end of
argument.

>Ehr...was I?

No.  I was just using examples.  People have tried, you know. ^_^

>By the way, Akane and Ranma DO love each other???! Really?
>Ooooh, I would have never guessed it myself...[kidding ^_-]

You'd be surprised at the number of people who try to argue against
this...

>arguing. I'm serious. WHY do think I would argue against anyone? WHY?
>Sigh.  ;_;

urk.  sorry.  I wasn't specifically using you.  I mean, I was writing in
second person, but it was just to prove a point.  The "you" didn't
actually mean you in specific.  It was a general "you."  It was merely an 
argument against fighting against established fact because I thought you
were suggesting that those facts were not necessarily the "truth" behind
the series.  Basically I thought you were suggesting that a person's
interpretation that could contradict with an established fact was as valid
as an established fact within a fictional world.  That is simply not the
case.  However, you didn't mean that, so, I'm sorry for
my misunderstanding.  ok? ^_^

Later,

Gareth