I was using intuition, not logic. I absolutely have not done the work necessary to construct an logical argument. I was only expressing my skepticism at was has only been anecdotal evidence designed to appeal to our natural inclination to "believe" or "feel" that a successful argument as been made in favor of a product. This is called a sales pitch or "marketing". If you choose to accept anecdotal evidence of the utility of of this $150-300 product that requires continual maintenance, then buy it! I suspect you already have, which is perhaps why you are wed to what is potentially a baseless argument. It
might not harm anything more than your pocketbook and a little of your time, but from with you might gain the satisfaction that peace-of-mind brings.
As far as the EPA, you are using intuition again...but its just as well, as my point was that the EPA is a political body and as such is devoid of logic. In fact, there is plenty of anecdotal evidence to suggest the EPA has done great harm to the environment it supposedly is chartered to protect.
With the help of Merriam-Webster, I've defined the differences between intuition and logic below ...if you care to read even this far.
Few on this forum, myself especially, are interested in reading or constructing a logical argument. Logic would force us to do things like examine the contents and volume of crankcase vapor in our specific application, understand the mature of the modern 4-stroke version of the internal combustion engine, appreciate the complex alkaline hydrocarbon "octane" and its effects on the combustion process, and what constitutes or contributes to undesirable valve-train deposits, among potentially dozens of other relevant facts. We'd have to apply a thorough examination of all of this data before arriving at conclusion. And that's also my point. It could very well be that oil separators and catch cans have a very useful purpose in our specific application. But never mind, the facts! The emotional/intuitive argument will be what carries the day!
log·ic /ˈläjik/ noun
- reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
(note that "if/then" statements does not necessary signal or define a logical argument)
Put simply:
Logic is a method of applying firmly established
concrete rules to arrive at decision.
Logic is hard. It forces one to engage the brain in much the same way of performing long division in your head.
in·tu·i·tion /ˌint(y)o͞oˈiSH(ə)n/
noun
- the ability to understand something immediately, without the need for conscious reasoning. A thing that one knows or considers likely from instinctive feeling rather than "conscious reasoning" [i.e. rather than using logic]
Put simply:
Intuition relies on abstract information gathered through experience or perception, rather that conscious reasoning, to arrive at decision.
Intuition is easy. Its tantamount to an emotional response or mere opinion. It triggers no more of the brain than solving 2+2.
