So, I wanted to determine which is more valuable, true, right, or likely to be useful in some debate or discussion etc.

You could lump in TV, songs etc with the movies.

I think things in the media can be useful examples, including movies, however, even then what happens doesn't prove a certain case. The filmmakers, news, artists, etc all add their own interpretations into whatever they do even if it's their most authentic work. They decide what to show, how to show it, etc. It's always removed from an issue at its heart.

So anything based on them then still would need to show that they are true or right outside of the movie if you want to apply its ideas. It's much the same if comparing anyone to a character in a movie, or expecting that any comment about anyone else would apply to some person. It's removed, so it is likely to have some errors and become more likely to be wrong.

But there is another thing about ideas that give them an advantage. You could take ideas/theories/philosophies and apply them to almost anything anywhere. But knowledge about movies is limited to movies. Ideas or sorts of ideas can be tested in so many places to know whether they can be trusted. Knowledge is composed of facts etc that might be true, but that doesn't make them useful, valuable, or part of something right. It doesn't make them applicable to other areas until used by some idea.


Another thing: some see debating as conflict. I don't have that view, but I know that being able to fight or argue for the ideas you care about is the one way to ensure that they be given the chance to be made into what you imagine. Otherwise some social structure can try to shape how they will be used, and possibly prevent them from blooming. That's worth fighting for. Certainly over some message board.

I'm so fucking high and this thread just made me burst into laughter!!!

Come on guys, anyone can speak trash.

Unless or until you deal with the topic I talked about it's much more likely to be a reflection of the truth than posting what you did. heh

Hate it, love it, despise it, that's how it is. heh

Anyway, also as to critics, they hardly can necessarily be expected to represent the 'best opinion'. Like anyone with an incentive to be right (basically everyone), they can overestimate their opinions, the importance of them, or the nature of them. What keeps it in check or prevents them from being too certain or from misapplying or misinterpreting them? At the BO forum there is all that data from past films and other things to substantiate an argument. In philosophy you could find things from all sort of situations to support an argument.

The thing is that it could be possible to convince a critic of a viewpoint, but they might not admit it for the sake of their profession. There is of course the status and advantage to being recognized as better at reviewing movies. But it of course should depend on the thoughts behind your claims.

Or you could try to speak trash and try to compare plumbers to critics reviewing movies, and totally miss the point.

Trash = something you have no more use for.

Sorry, movies knowledge is less important than ideas or ways of understanding movies.

Come on, be realistic and acknowledge that philosophy and critical thinking apply to everything and can make all the difference. I'd rather have a well written wikipedia article then a review from the most knowledgeable critic who isn't willing to have his ideas challenged by anyone who can make a coherent, thoughtful, and well connected argument.

Oh, and on a somewhat related point to the first post in this thread, I thought it was interesting the way Bride Wars demonstrated something as true.

The part where 'In his world he's just working late, while in yours he has proposed'. It shows that different knowledge of facts (or what you think is factual) can lead to different interpretations and conclusions. But either way, one set of things did happen (or will be found out to have happened).

Just because I have to put this in, ideas don't exist with or change for time.

Right, I wanted to add that it can also be determined as true because that same sort of thing could be done in many different ways in many different movies to prove the same point.

I love you.

Ahem...

What happened to the old DP07 who would just overpredict big movies from time to time? Can we get him back?

ROTFL!!

So, that's ok, but debating, or 'conflict' is not ok in the forum now?

In what I posted I'm providing plenty of opportunities to pick my argument apart, or show me to be wrong. It's a controversial issue, it relates to all sorts of things you could pull examples from, and there are many parts of it that depend on each other and could be pulled apart (if possible ).

Shouldn't that keep me honest? In fact, how could it not? A mistake and the whole thing could go wrong for me. If I'm not honest with myself shouldn't it continuously cause my ideas to crumble?

Instead you're suggesting it would be better of me to attack you or something at your site? I'm not interested in that sort of fight. What does it produce? What did your post even allow me to reply to? I think that if we are talk or believe anything about these topics we should do it in the best way possible. Talking about ideas or philosophy might cause disagreements, but we would at least be focused on the substance of it that encourages thinking. It's complicated; there's no need to feel compelled to be consumed with animosity.

I suppose I should mention again about self-righteousness. While I said that there's nothing wrong with trying to be right or truthful, there can be something wrong with trying to get others to believe you or trying to affect others. Certainly at least depending on how you do it. You just try to call me 'high' while ignoring what I'm talking about, which is an important topic whatever you think of it. Never-mind that philosophy can enhance your abilities, to the contrary of what drugs are supposed to do. You can't expect anyone to pay heed to that.

heh, I'm glad someone liked it.

heh, I'm had to answer this before.

I would also underpredict them and between too. Although I'm guessing you know that...Anyway...

I always predicted movies as a side thing (oh, and that at least exposes you to being wrong; the predictions on one level, but the more complicated and important ideas on another). I always considered philosophy a lot more important. I mean even this sort of stuff isn't that different from BO arguments (or many I've had in the forum). It applies to it.