[mannykannot]

> The video is pointing out the name you call something isn't important.

Firstly, this is a misreading of the video. The absurdity of this position can be seen from extending your example through replacing every noun in your comments by "guacamole".

Secondly, "blind" is an adjective, and one that you use at every opportunity (except where you are looking up definitions - by the way, isn't looking up definitions an odd preoccupation for someone who doesn't see anything of importance in what you call something?) It is well-known that you cannot outright prove anything about the natural world by induction, but to lump everything that is not proven into the category of specifically blind faith ignores the epistemic value of evidence and just leads to what you call a stupid, useless, argument.

[jacquesm]

> The absurdity of this position can be seen from extending your example through replacing every noun in your comments by "guacamole".

Ouch. Funny though.

[P5fRxh5kUvp2th]

It's a complete misunderstanding of what's being said.