Of course, you have a better explanation for why the apple with a bite out of it
Not that I need to provide any 'better' explanation (because its you who are challenging the null hypothesis, not me) but sure. Lets play that game. What about:
"No specific reason at all, they randomly thought of apple because it was laying on the table or something. They laughed, they liked it and they went with it".
I really recommend applying Hanlon's razor to not overthink things: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
(To be more serious though, the bite part is to make it look like apple, without the bite it can be confused with other fruits)
(To be more serious though, the bite part is to make it look like apple, without the bite it can be confused with other fruits)
Apple, pear, plum, peach... I must be insane if I think that thing on the top left is an apple, right?
Asserting you are claiming to have superior knowledge in a sarcastic way has nothing to do with argumentation or fallacy. And your further remarks stating that the apple is not distinctive without the bite is absurd, and you know it.
I don't think Hanlon's razor is a good rule to live by, far more potent a logical razor is Occam's razor, which states that the simplest explanation is probably correct.
Hanlon was clearly a dupe. Attributing error to malice is a safer call in all cases. Better to avoid someone than risk them proving you wrong (about your suspicion).
As for the apple, the bite and the rainbow, the apple is called Malus, the acid in it is called malic acid, which is from the old latin which means "evil" and "small". It has a 5 pointed star, in section through the centre where the seeds are, and has been associated with the devil and the story in Genesis 3 for hundreds of years.
And maybe there is no irony in this at all, really, that the entire theme of that chapter is precisely deception, that is used to trick people into poisoning themselves.
I could talk about some other theories about the identity of that fruit, or the fact that the Pentateuch predates Judaism (it's derivative of Sumerian and Phonecian mythology). But I think it's enough to say that there is nothing innocent about the meaning of that logo. No different to the extensive set of set of symbols used by Google for their various logos that are taken straight out of babylonian, phonecian, sumerian and other mythologies that are associated with what the Jews, Muslims and Christians all associate with Satan, or if you prefer more original names, Chronus or Saturn depending on which side of the mediterranean we are talking.
reply
deleted by author
reply