OK, Uncle Lewy will tell you about a psychological experiment conducted by scientists. Here on Sola, you should also learn something.
In this experiment, psychologists presented several stories to a larger group of people. Each story represented a complex of ideas. Each of these stories was well thought out and they all seemed meaningful and clever at first glance. In some of them, however, the psychologists had implemented small logical mistakes, which only became apparent on closer inspection. Through these logical errors these stories, in which the errors were incorporated, objectively became more or less dumb.
The degrees of complexity of the stories were partly different, the mistake that created the nonsense was tricky in different ways.
Now the psychologists wanted the participants to give an honest assessment of the stories. They also asked further questions to find out whether the participant actually understood the stories or not.
The evaluation brought very interesting results. Here, I want to explain only the part that is interesting for us.
All cases in which a story was described by one participant as stupid and dumb were collected and clustered. The psychologists gained the following insights:
A certain large group of participants had described stories as dumb because they contained the logical mistake and were therefore indeed dumb. They had understood all the stories and even discovered the logical errors in the faulty stories.
Another large group of participants had described stories as dumb, although these stories did not contain any logical mistake. They had understood most stories wrongly and had also "identified" error-free stories as dumb. In other words, they called the stories dumb, not because the stories were indeed dumb, but because the stories were so complex that they did not understand them. These parzicipants have been the dumb ones.
Be that as it may. What does this have to do with the screenshot? Oh, that doesn't matter. "Jackpot!"
H2 use the imperative form in a relationship