So, since when did we become so unfocused and desperate for challanges that we start fights over a definition?
By now 'Indoctrination Theory' is not a good title to refer to when debating about its viability, it has so many varieties by now that one simply cannot say for sure which one someone is referring to, like when the community managers said that (paraphrasing) "the IT is possible but no new endings".
Technically one always has to state which version one is using. And to doubt and question THAT IT does not make one a 'non-believer'. Belief is for literalists, we should rely on facts and full arguments. If one has an argument against it one should be free to write it and the others so respectful and read it.
This is not the 16th century or a literalist thread where you have to watch out before stating your opinion. As long as you bring logical arguments it's fine.
Modifié par MaximizedAction, 26 novembre 2012 - 07:51 .