It doesn't say "Billy Bob has an ulcer, therefore Hot Peppers do not have any nutritional value", I don't understand how you think like that, it's fundamental logic.
You pick apart the Hot Peppers when that is not the issue. The nutritional content of the peppers is aside from the question "are they good for everyone?". A chili pepper might be good for Juan but it might not be good for a 2 week old baby. We can't change an "absolute truth" with relativism. Fire is hot and it burns, so one cannot say "Fire doesn't burn me only you". The nutritional content of Hot Peppers does not establish a universal truth. They are not good for everyone on the planet. On Aug 23, 10:38 am, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > On Aug 23, 6:44 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Juan: "Hot Peppers are really "Good" for you" (true) > > Billy Bob: "That's true but I have an ulcer so they're "Not Good" for > > me" (true) > > I think this is a fallacy, false dichotomy? (I might need help, I am > working on the fallacies) > The way I see it, fact one: "there are nutritional components in > peppers" > Just because Billy Bob has an ulcer does not remove the first truth --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
