Trigger words: wise
Indicator sentences: Is it though?
Negotiation parts: [STA-CITE]> Additionally without doing either of these things you don't really understand what it means to be drunk or high. [END-CITE]I also don't know how it is to have a penis or what it's like to be a lawyer. Is there any reason that not understanding these things makes me inferior to somebody who does? What is a better definition of wise if not having more experiences or a broader range of experiences? Yes, not having a penis or not being a lawyer makes you inferior when it comes to taking about or making laws about people who have or are those things. You have no firsthand experience so your opinion is less valid than someone who does. You also didn't address my point that drinking or smoking marijuana might help you better understand our culture or history. There are many mentions of both drugs (marijuana and alcohol) in tv shows, movies, books, ect. Without doing either, I think it would be hard to understand the character's motivations or actions in many of those culture objects. [STA-CITE]> What is a better definition of wise if not having more experiences or a broader range of experiences? [END-CITE]Well, one better definition is the [general definition of wisdom] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom): being able to understand the experiences that you have. [STA-CITE]> makes you inferior when it comes to taking about or making laws about people who have or are those things. [END-CITE]Well, sure, but that wasn't in your CMV. Also, no, not being x does not make your opinion automatically inferior to somebody who is x. For instance, somebody who has critically examined the interchange between sex and gender and how it presents in society would be a better lawmaker than just a random person with a penis. [STA-CITE]> You also didn't address my point that drinking or smoking marijuana might help you better understand our culture or history. [END-CITE]That's because you didn't tell me why I should strive to understand your culture or history. Perhaps my time is better spent understanding the culture and history of the prohibitionists or the Quakers, who have pretty much 0 exposure to alcohol. Also, is it the act of drinking alcohol that will help me understand you, or is it the act of drinking alcohol *within your cultural-historical paradigm* that will give me that knowledge? Because I imagine the social norms revolving around alcohol in America are different than in Italy are different than in Japan are different than in Saudi Arabia.
Trigger words: immature
Indicator sentences: So I'm immature for making the rational choice to never do drugs? I've never done drugs before (I've drank a bit of alcohol and that's it) but I wish I didn't. I don't see how me not doing those things would even mean I'm immature. Do you know what immature means?
Trigger words: fundamental (2)
Indicator sentences: However, if you define "fundamental human experience" some other way, then how do you decide what a "fundamental human experience" is? What makes it fundamental?
Negotiation parts: Dying from common illnesses or childbirth (prior to the advent of modern medicine and hygiene) was incredibly common. As well was living in nomadic tribes. Driving is pretty common, but cars have not been around for nearly as long. Same goes for phones or computers. Would you argue that someone who refused to drive or use modern technology was also missing this "fundamental experience"? What defines a "fundamental human experience"?