07-02-2013, 03:18 PM
(07-02-2013, 02:02 PM)Gretel Hanselsister Wrote: The second scene is where the forensics-lady says "Well, could be vampires or someone who wants to be a vampire." She gives three options: Vampires, dark rituals, much blood in a short time. This could include of course a little homage to vampires by the writers, but I'm not convinced.I learned a long time ago that there is no convincing of anyone of anything on the Internet. There is no burden of proof here. Neither of us wins by default. There is also no degree of evidence that must be presented for a person to be considered "convinced." If I have not convinced you, it could simply mean (1) I'm really dumb and I don't realize my arguments are bad (2) you're a stubborn person and I couldn't convince you that the sky is blue for even a portion of the day or (3) there's a semantic barrier preventing us from actually seeing the other person's argument. However, no matter what the case may be, I do not care whether I have convinced you or anyone.
(07-02-2013, 02:02 PM)Gretel Hanselsister Wrote: OK, "your" vampires don't need to be undead and drink blood (the real thing, liquid, fresh, warm!)? It's enough to plug little holes into the victim's neck? I'm a purist and you are truely flexibleLol, purist DOES NOT mean someone is inflexible. It means someone takes a very narrow unchanging definition based on some model (e.g., for Zombies, purists usually base it on Romero's Night of the Living dead). I, on the other hand, satisfy terms with very broad definitions. For example, would you say that Monroe is a werewolf? I would say he is. My definition of werewolf is as follows:
1. A human who can physically transform to have wolf-like features.
The above is all that is necessary for me, and it's very broad. But the purist will say, "No, no no, that's all wrong. A werewolf is only a werewolf if he changes when the moon is full. Also, werewolves must be hurt only by silver. Also, werewolves are not innate creatures, but humans who have been bitten a werewolf and got the werewolf disease. If all of these requirements are not satisfied, then no werewolf." Bah humbug I say. Broad definition counts.
Therefore, saying you're a purist is neither a good or bad thing. However, it means I know very well we are going to have to agree to disagree on this topic. I can no more make a purist understand that my broad definition counts, any more than he/she will ever make me believe that a werewolf is only a werewolf if the transformation occurs during the full moon. Technically speaking, I am just as inflexible as the purist in saying a broad definition always counts while the purist says only the narrow one does.