A Flat Argument

I can see a planet through my window.

It’s Earth.

I’m certain (without getting Cartesian about it) this is the word given to my home planet, and well, here I am. Certain, in spite of all the facts attributed to my home planet, by other inhabitants, which may or may not be the case.

I mean, for a start - it may not be flat.

It probably isn’t spherical, strictly speaking, according to at least one distinguished scientist; the effect of the way Earth moves on its trajectory through space turns it rather pear-shaped. I’m more sure it is round than I am sure it’s flat, but then I’m even surer it is pear-shaped, because if I’m to fall for the official narrative it seems logical to go the whole way.

The arguments made in favour of the flat-Earth position are tantalising though.

I’m not going to get into the specific details, but the Earth is spinning, isn’t it? It’s spinning fast, right? At the same time as hurtling through space at high speed. Taking the atmosphere, and the weather, along with it.

Feels steady to me.

If you coasted through your life without being told this, then the news was sprung on you one day, it would seem somewhat unarguable, wouldn’t it?

Why aren’t the stars moving?

I suppose it must have something to do with scale; the size of planet Earth making its velocity relatively imperceptible to ordinary human senses.

But it isn’t pure stupidity which would cause one to doubt it. And believing what we’re told by authority figures is the supporting evidence, for the majority of us, by my reckoning.

Even if we’re right.

You can be as right as is humanly possible, but if it’s on the basis of what someone told you, is it intelligence? I mean in the sense of thought-through, understood, well-argued, worked-out sense. Not intelligence in the sense of ‘good information’ (if it’s correct, it’s good information by definition.)

If someone intelligently argues a point to you, you should be more inclined to accept it than if the opinion is simply stated. The opinion might be wrong, or right in either or both cases…but there is a difference between taking something at face-value, and believing it because it is well-argued.

It’s not enough to be right.

It isn’t.

It’s right to be right, it isn’t necessarily very clever.

What if your argument is well-argued, but you’re wrong?

Well, it’s not well-argued enough, I might argue, but still, there is a problem here. You can see why people get wound up when they know they’re right, but someone won’t agree. If you’re wrong, there should be some sort of default loss of the argument in due course, and the person who is right should shine through. It almost leads to a theological point - if only there was a god who could chime in and say ‘hello - yes, he’s right’. Then we could all relax, say ‘thank god’, and celebrate the person who was right all along.

Failing that, surely events (or ‘time’) will tell.

But, you know someone who was blatantly wrong is going to distort reporting on the outcome, and once again, an instance of ‘who was right’ being able to say ‘I told you so’ is thwarted. Perhaps because proving you are right to the other person is, apparently, the important thing under the circumstances.

But what if it turned out you were wrong? You were so sure you were right, but there was some tiny flaw which tipped the whole thing in the other person’s favour. Or, and this might be easier to swallow…what if convincing the other person you are right is a bad idea, because that person is motivated by ideological opposition to your position in general? Or simply negatively affected by pressure to change their point of view?

The planet outside my window is flat.

At least, from what I can see, it’s flat. Where I walk, generally speaking, it’s flat.

Even if on the whole, it’s actually round, well, it’s still flat, isn’t it?

Are you trying to tell me the Earth isn’t flat? Have you ever tried to stand upright on a football? You must find it shattering, having to walk uphill and downhill all the time.

Who’s right?

And does it matter?

The Earth is round and flat.

But if the flat-Earth people had it their way, the scientific community would fall off their chairs, and if the globalists got too powerful, no-one would be permitted to express the words:

I’m going for a walk on the flat earth without fear of falling off the edge.

I’m exercising.

- Freedom of speech.




Hover in the cells to see a range of categories.

  Choose One...

Epistemology/Metaphysics Logic Theology Politics/Ethics Psychology/The Mind Reviews Swat


...or swat the wasp for a chance discourse!