“I’m am intolerant of anyone who believes 2 + 2 = 5. What about you?”
I don’t care. If they won’t listen to me when I tell them it’s four, I move along. I have the truth that they refuse to accept, so I have the advantage.
Your approach appears to be to bludgeon them over the head until they get it. Of course, you neglect the fact that 2.4 rounds to two, and 4.8 rounds to five; so the person that says 2 + 2 = 5 may well simply have more information than you - he’s decided not to exclude the second significant digit.
Therefore, a much more productive approach is to try and -understand- why they think the way they do. If, once you have that understanding, you continue to disagree with them, you have a much better basis on which to do it.
“Your approach appears to be to bludgeon them over the head until they get it. Of course, you neglect the fact that 2.4 rounds to two, and 4.8 rounds to five; so the person that says 2 + 2 = 5 may well simply have more information than you - he’s decided not to exclude the second significant digit.”
I’m trained as an engineer, and now I do multi million dollar deals. If I am doing engineering and I make egregious errors, people could die. If I make such an error in a business transaction, bankruptcy can ensue and people could be forced to the brink of disaster with homes lost.
I find it odd that you would expect me to be less exacting in choosing a president (the current one has acted as executioner of many thousands and lost thousands in battle), or in choosing religious dogma that could risk the very souls of people, than I am in my material affairs.
If so, I have a sure fire design for a 747 that’s only off by 2 + 2 = 5 in the fatigue stress measurements.