I Wrote a Poem

Those were generalizations, and, in the grand scheme of things, humans are brittle. If you don't think that, then you're misguided.

@Killers: I just choose to see strengths in people, why does that make me misguided?

@Reject: I'm not denying that people have strengths...I'm just saying that the human race is fragile. That's not necessarily a bad thing. It's actually scientifically factual so... 🤔

@Killers: You're talking about our bodies, right? So then why does the first part of your poem mention wisdom?

@Reject: Not sure why you jumped from fragility to wisdom? The first part is a generalization and it's more poetic, the last line is the one that's based on scientific fact.

@Killers: I was considering all of your poem and not only the last part. I figured that's what you did with poems. It's not scientifically proven that all people are fragile psychologically. So that doesn't resonate well with the first part of the poem. Yes, we're all weak physically, it's very easy to die, but when you bring wisdom into the picture, it just makes it seem as though you find people weak in every way.

@Reject: I didn't say they were "fragile psychologically". I said they were fragile, in general. I think you misinterpreted the poem and that's the problem here. The first two lines are supposed to be what separates us and is completely detached (except by rhyme) from the third and fourth line which is about what brings us together. It's a simple poem. Stop overthinking it and just let it be. It's more rewarding that way.

@Killers: Oh. It's not cohesive then. It's separate. The first two lines are generalizions that don't even always apply, and the last two lines are all about saying we're weak and that's what holds us together. Then I'm misguided for not seeing people as weak, even though science only goes as far as the body in the definitive context of weak. Okay.

@Reject: Just because a poem isn't as complex as you want to make it, doesn't make it any less cohesive. By "detached" I meant logically detached, not poetically. Humans are fragile both mentally and physically on the grand scheme of things. It's not a bad thing to be fragile, it's what makes us human. I feel like Ray Bradbury being told by a college student that his own interpretation of his novel is wrong.

@Killers: You're not wrong. You're only wrong when you call other people wrong for seeing things differently from you. Science isn't even a part of that. It's our perspective.

@Reject: Well...it's my poem, so...
Read: http://www.factfiend.com/ray-bradbury-told-interpretation-book-wrong/

@Killers: It's your poem coming from a belief that I don't share. That doesn't make you wrong or me wrong, it just makes us different in how we see people. Facts like I said, only apply to our body in a abolsute way. Science cannot say "humans are fragile both mentally and physically on the grand scheme of things" because that can't be proven. It's merely a viewpoint. Maybe as far as our body, but mentally it's a whole different thing.

@Reject: ...Actually it can be proven. I mean, weakness is why things like torture work so well.

Here's an answer from Quora by Ira Vashishtha that I think is apt at describing why humans are so emotionally susceptible to pressure:


Links:
http://www.evoanth.net/2015/01/08/why-are-humans-weak-our-fragile-bones/
http://thetruthwins.com/archives/scientists-discover-proof-that-humanity-is-getting-dumber-smaller-and-weaker

Also, like I said several billion times fragility is not a bad thing. It makes us human, and it makes us spiritually strong although physically and mentally we may not always be as sturdy.

@Killers: How exactly does any of that prove that people are weak in general? Effective torture doesn't mean weak. Weaker than before doesn't mean weak. Weak is so subjective, you're trying to prove a opinion... do you not see how wrong that is?

@Reject: Did you not read the articles? It literally talks about how humans are both physically and mentally fragile according to scientific studies in comparison to other animals and in comparison to human ancestors. Also for the five billionth time, being fragile isn't a bad thing. If you can't understand that, can you stop replying? Thanks. Your over-analyzation of a simple, two-second poem isn't appreciated nor necessary. Here's Ray Bradbury giving the middle finger:

@Killers: I never said fragile was a bad thing. I'm not sure why you keep mentioning that. I'm merely saying I don't see humans that way. You're the one trying to say your opinion is a fact. I can see how mature you are about this though so I'll just leave it there.

@Reject: Mature? You can't seem to take a Ray Bradbury joke so it's apparent how mature you are, dude. Anyway, I just sent you scientific evidence to back up my claim and you continue to deny it. There's no point in continuing a conversation with someone who asks for evidence and when given it simply brushes it aside.

@Killers: That's not evidence. Most of it was talking about what these scientists view as weak. Weak is still a matter of opinion.

@Reject: It wasn't a "matter of opinion" it was in comparison to other species and past checkpoints in human evolution. You just can't seem to accept factual evidence for some reason and I don't know why.

@Killers: Comparisons don't make something weak.

@Reject: Scientists have scientific checkpoints and definitions that they use to determine things. That's how they determine a "weak force" for example. If you're going to deny evidence, then there's no point in continuing to talk to you.

@Killers: A rock is good at sinking. A feather is good at floating. The rock is weak at floating and the feather is weak at sinking. These are different things and have different strengths and weaknesses. That doesn't make either weak, just weak in different ways.

@Reject: That analogy is incomparable to the scientific measurement of human mental and physical strengths and weaknesses. If you can't accept fact, you're not worth my time. Buh bye.

@Killers: Bye then. I'm sorry different perspectives are such a problem for you.

@Reject: Different perspectives? Denying science isn't a respectable perspective to hold. That's like saying I'm a bad person for disagreeing with those who think the Earth is flat. Bye.