Discussion on the net - I sometimes wonder if that is a discussion? , I think - there are people who say such lines.

"Read book "AAA" by the guru John Smith, and you could understand what I want to say to you!"

At the stage when I find out this line, "the person's defeat" comes to decided definitely.

-----

The purpose of "I win by argument" is "my own interest".

In order for my own interest, I have to prove the logic by myself. This is called "burden of proof" as a law term.

In civil trials, plaintiffs, and in the criminal trial, prosecutors, will bear burden of proof.

-----

"Read book "AAA" by the guru John Smith, and you could understand what I want to say to you!" is nonsense

- The person who insists on correctness of "the book "AAA" by the guru John Smith" should

- understand the contents of the book deeply. and

- break (or defend) the opponent's argument

The person has a "responsibility" of the above.

By the way, the method used for this proof of responsibility is "reason", and

"theory" is to assemble several "reasons",and to make it a well-ordered story .

Well, set it aside.

(To be continued)