Printable View
I pondered this dilemma while constructing "best alcohol" and "worst alcohol" lists with my friends. We easily agreed on the worst possible alcoholic beverages (2 week old Natty Ice, $3 tequila handles, etc.) but we couldn't agree on what was the best. Or rather, we could agree on the best, but each had his own order, whereas we were nearly unaniminous in order for worst drinks. Does this apply to other areas too? Like politicians maybe. What else?
Is this a philosophical debate or just a matter of semantics?
Anyway, worse is always easily denounced -- it is that which lacks in the characteristics you are gauging: poor soda is flat, overtly syruppy, or any other characteristic. Very enjoyable soda...well, people have different tastes, and since 'perfect' soda can be 'perfect cola', or 'perfect sprite' or 'perfect 7up' or whatever, people can argue a well brewed cola/sprite/7up/grape soda/soda water can be all examples of perfection.
:D?
I agree with PG. It's easy to agree on what's not good because it meets (or fails to meet) the most general characteristics first. When deciding when something is good, the general characteristics have already been met while detailed characteristics are typically personal preference.
Being pessimistic is always easy.
:D
I dunno, me and my stoner buddies have a pretty easy time agreeing on our favorite paraphanelia.
Choosing the worst is always easiest, imo.
PG: Me? Philosophical? :D No, not this time. It had something to do with alcohol, so I posted it.