Quote:
Originally posted by Johnny Boy:
Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
Being objective ... the point of my example was that the boy was right ... and with time and perseverence ... that was acknowledged by all.

Had he criticized the adults who disagreed with him they would have gotten defensive and he'd have been ignored.

Human nature, good, bad, and ugly, is what it is.

Unfortunately for many of us a lot of the time.
By just saying that the Emporer is naked, the adults disagreeing with the boy would have been on the defensive and they will tell him to keep quiet or "leave the kitchen when things become too hot" because they "believe" that the Emporer has clothes. How else could the boy then persevere but to restate his observation and pointing out to the adults that they are not wanting to look at the facts? It seems to me that your analogy is flawed?
no, they did not beleive it. they beleive that everyone else did. that is a big difference. as soon as anyone said that they were not alone in the beleive that he did not have cloths, the illusion of believe created by the scammers disappeared.

the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.