Who in this image is correct?

LMAO 6IX9INE

Attached: 6ix_PEPE.png (256x247, 89K)

This. Black text pushed his 105 IQ to the limit with this and probably felt like a philosopher when he was finished (really he is just a dumb bitch).

NIGGAS IFFY UH BLICKY GOT THE STICKY UH I TOUCH KIDDIES UH SUCK ON MY STIFFY UH

Attached: 20F1BD66-50CB-403F-A164-A86BCAE1062B.jpg (600x600, 59K)

NINE guy reporting in
cmon folks we can't let em get away with this

Maybe the correct response is that the number is six until you of the perspective that it it is nine. Perhaps the image means to explain that our actions need only to be validated by ourselves because one reason persuaded to a different opinion one has changed fundamentally enough to no longer be held consequence to actions made under another belief. Maybe the image means to say that the one who does not reject himself must succumb to the possibility of an alternate future, and yet at the same time each future in which ones ideals change succumbs to the possibility of incorrect action at the feet of the greater past
>like in some sort of hypothetical personal 69
> tee hee

Attached: 5166EE76-CC11-4730-9008-7CEDF2ED0D01.jpg (1920x1080, 114K)

Dumb phone not work ree

It's obviously the greek symbol for sigma you fucking plebs

Six is right becous 9 in German is neun.

tbqh famalamadingdongs you're all retarded

Attached: mess.png (828x1628, 761K)

They're more like anti-food for thought. Just think of it as an excuse to shut the fuck up in every sense of the word - just like this post.

shut the fuck up

they should sixty-nine each other and whoever cums first wins

Attached: stale.png (828x2446, 932K)

Red was correct, people that think there's more than one best answer to anything are retarded

The person who wrote the number there.

Both can be correct in certain situations. Red believes in the power that authorial intent has in dictating meaning, whereas black neglects authorial intent in favor of consumer interpretation. That said, both writers' logic is inconsistent because red is refuting the intent of the original image's creator for the purpose of saying that authorial intent is important, while black reaffirms the intent of the original creator in an effort to say that authorial intent is less important than consumer interpretation.

This is why lines are printed underneath nines in order to confirm orientations.

Black
I can't stand retards who smugly take hypotheticals literally

Both were right, but also wrong for the wrong reasons.

Attached: 1987498729837442.png (948x1472, 124K)

Black text. Red text took a metaphor literally. His literal assessment is correct but it misses the point.

Given a set of parameters, there can only be a single correct answer. There can, however, exist two different sets of similar but differing parameters which are more related to the entity seeking the answer. If the argument is that it was drawn to be X number, there is cerrainly only a single possible answer. If, however, one or both were simply stating that the number looked like a six or nine to tgem, and were not commenting on its intent, there is no correct answer or any answer at all, since that would be an opinion.
tl,dr: Opinions and preferences can differ but facts are concrete.

they're both wrong. red is unreasonably against the original opinion and black is unreasonably in favor. they're both biased. i would say black is the most insufferable for being hypocritical in refuting red.

both illustrated people in the image are correct. from one person's perspective, the drawing on the ground appears to be a "6" and from the other person's perspective, it appears to be a "9." they are simply communicating what number they are seeing from their individual perspectives. one person seeing a 6 and communicating what they see does not mean that the other person is not seeing a 9, or is incorrect to communicate what they're seeing. If a door was painted red on one side and green on the other, and I said my side was painted green and someone standing on the other side said it was painted red, we would both be correct. The top typewriter font text is misleading, partly because it uses an unnecessary comma after "mean." Additionally, the message in the caption is misleading, because it sets up a false dichotomy in the 6 vs 9 perspective scenario. There is no evidence to suggest the men in the picture are having an argument, or telling each other that one is wrong and the other is right. A better caption would be "different perspectives can reveal more information about a subject." The message in the red font is wrong to assume more about the image than what is originally presented, although he could be responding to the misleading caption. there is nothing in the image to suggest that there is a world beyond the 6/9 or the two men, so there is no reason to believe that it is either 6 or 9. It would be difficult to prove his second paragraph right or wrong. It is frustrating to think that there are people out there who have less information about a subjeect that believe their viewpoint on that subject is equally valid as someone's with more information; however, he does not prove that the existence of those people is what is "ruining the world." The message in the black arial text is wrong for even more reasons than the previous statement. the author's argument is not nearly as clear as the message in the black arial font states.

Hypocrite that you are, for you trust the 6s and 9s in your brain to tell you they are 6s and 9s. Will you fight? Or will you perish like a dog?

The black text is a complete faggot the original text is a fag too. If the guys from the pic switched sides they would understand that there are dealing with an ambiguous situation and then proceed to finding out the actual truth like red suggested. They both aren't right the problem is that they both are stubborn fags.

CONT.
If that were the author's argument, he would've stated so more clearly and directly. Also, that doesn't really make much sense
>"there are some topics and ideas that are different for people with different perspectives, and can't be objectively classified."
if i look at a ball from one inch away, and can see the details of it, and someone else is looking at tat same ball from 100ft away, and it appears much smaller, it's still the same ball. it isn't different just because we have different perspectives on it. And while it may be possible that absolute objective truth is beyond the grasp of humans, it is also possible that it is within our grasp, and it is possible that all things may be "objectively classified." in short, they're all incorrect in different ways.

>Just because you are right, does not mean I am wrong
holy shit i've been enlightened. Anyone up for making a The Democratic Fascist Communist's and Capitalist's Islamic Theocracy of Christian Faith?

They're all retards and cunts. No one wins and the world becomes an even slightly shittier place.

>Anyone up for making a The Democratic Fascist Communist's and Capitalist's Islamic Theocracy of Christian Faith?
is it LGBTQ accepting?