1. Because he's referring to its current location and not whether it's indigenous to his head.Titan wrote:Yes,he refers to his nucleus inside his head not his body.He can't be more obvious than that.Perfect wrote:I don't know where you're getting that there's no room for interpretation, since as I stated on numerous posts, he doesn't state that his nucleus is indigenous to his head. He merely states there's a clump of nerves there currently as he's speaking that make up his nucleus. Also note, he doesn't say whether or not his head is destroyed, he specifically refers to his nucleus, meaning he could lose his head and survive. However, I think this arguments gone on far enough and does deserves its own thread and I'll type one up in a bit.
I think he doesn't need to do it,because he points to his head.Also note, he doesn't say whether or not his head is destroyed, he specifically refers to his nucleus, meaning he could lose his head and survive.
2. Because he's pointing towards the nucleus in his head. Notice he says, "There's a small clump in my head", meaning currently, not "There's always been a small clump in my head" or "There's been a small clump inside my head". Then note he directly refers to the clump for a reason, not because he just mentioned it's in his head, but because it's whether or not the nucleus survives. There's no evidence towards what you're saying, other than being closed minded and objective.
3. I'd really prefer if any further arguments could be brought up in the aforementioned thread.







