I find it kinda funny how people lose the game simply because I declare that I have won.. which really, I always have. About the game: I have determined why people become so frustrated with my "abstract" way of thinking. You see, most people follow a maze from the beginning to the end,falling for all the traps along the way,eventually(maybe) reaching their destination;the end(if they perservere the full duration). I,however,have always been the child who starts at the end of the maze, working the maze backwards. Some people would relate this to intuition,but these answers,all the truths we know,are ones that come from within ourselves. I simply skip the frivilous steps that may lead us to lies and begin the maze explaining what I already know: that there is an end to the maze and that it must have begun at another point to lead to an end. When you work a maze backwards,it's much easier to identify false paths leading to dead ends because the misleading paths tend to seem like they lead towards the center of the maze relative to what the perspective of a person working the maze forward a would naturally assume the "right" turn would be to quickly get to the center. Knowing this, I follow the path logically,more directly,believing most of the wrong turns would be pointed the direction of the "end";the opposite direction relative to the one I should going in. Typically,I know the true answer before I ever start a debate, and the challenge then becomes proving it to all the people who think differently.
The way to win the game is to understand the game's rules,to know the winner, before you ever play.
*update*
ReplyDeleteapparently this approach is actually something freshly applied to the field of science,and it's so non-mainstream,it hasn't become an esteemed method of systemizing yet. It's called: Antireductionism-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antireductionism
The ironic part is I used antireductionist theory to discover the concept of antireductionism,and to then later discover it was something online. It's a good thing,though.. They say IQ has this thing called a bell-curve,and the fact that I'm surpassing modern theory at my age and point in education is.. ironic :P or maybe not. Maybe it makes sense. In any case,at least this is confirmation I'm on the right track if I haven't already passed what is still underground knowledge.