Wow @ that article. The wife sounds like she's bragging about how she's one of the few wives who can tame her husband into being denied the Super Bowl and then trying to justify it on the internet. Her notions of compromise are amusing.
Whoa @ how the rest of the thread turned out. For what it's worth, Opiate's right. I think what gets most people's panties in a twist is that when they hear him say that "there's no objective meaningfulness", they assume that it means that there is no subjective meaningfulness as well.
Opiate has even admitted that sports are meaningful to a lot of people and that even he himself finds lots of subjective meaningfulness in baseball. But still, many seem to gloss over that.
Opiate has a clear, testable definition for "objective meaningfulness", whereas some of you arguing with him hold a definition of "meaningfulness" that uses a subjective standard of measure. That's where the conflict arises.
I said it was depressing because then you're faced with the reality that the vast majority of people that have ever lived have contributed nothing to society.
Paging a Master Ninja. lol.
Seriously, though, the vast majority of people that have ever lived have contributed
something to society. Even doing the most mundane things at work contribute to a connected economy that drives wealth and progress. Those great thinkers who came up with brilliant inventions, scientific theories, and beautiful symphonies should thank their lucky stars that if it weren't for the rest of us humans living our lives, they would have spent all their time hunting, gathering, and dying horribly instead.
, and went on to talk about gwyneth paltrow and shit then put it up as if to show off her shiny new leash... its not even a real compromise.
