Blogarithm

That beard is awesome. I want a beard like that.

 

- Vorex

Totally gonna grow a beard like that.

That is an okay beard.

That is an okay beard.

OKAY? OKAY?

We obviously aren't looking at the same beard, mate.

 

- Vorex

That beard is the definition of all that is right and just.

 

Just saying.

 

~Soran

The accidental composition of molecules does not have a high enough substance in this case (as the hair is only the accidents of the body and thus of itself has no substance) to refute an argument. Furthermore, in order to refute an argument, the substance used must stand in contradiction of the argument proposed. Thus, as this only can work in some particular cases, the universality of the picture's statement is in grave error, and thus is false.

 

In short: the flesh profits nothing, being accidents only. Thus, it is concluded, that the substance is what matters. Therefore, my reply reads:

 

As the opposite of what you say is true, your statement must be erroneous.

The accidental composition of molecules does not have a high enough substance in this case (as the hair is only the accidents of the body and thus of itself has no substance) to refute an argument. Furthermore, in order to refute an argument, the substance used must stand in contradiction of the argument proposed. Thus, as this only can work in some particular cases, the universality of the picture's statement is in grave error, and thus is false.

 

In short: the flesh profits nothing, being accidents only. Thus, it is concluded, that the substance is what matters. Therefore, my reply reads:

 

As the opposite of what you say is true, your statement must be erroneous.

However, Seneca Crane still has that beard. Therefore, your argument is invalid.

Unfortunately, there is not rationality in your statement, and therefore it has not grounds to refute. Therefore, it is concluded that since the opposite of what you say is true, your statement must be erroneous.