"The real trouble with this world of ours is not that it is an unreasonable world, nor even that it is a reasonable one. The commonest kind of trouble is that it is nearly reasonable, but not quite… It looks just a little more mathematical and regular than it is; its exactitude is obvious, but its inexactitude is hidden; its wildness lies in wait." G.K. Chesterton (1874 – 1936), one of the most influential English writers of the 20th centuryDoes the world look more analytical than it really is?
If it is so, does this mean that we shouldn't seach for the analytics of things?
I'm not so sure about the first debate, but as for the second one, I don't think so.
What do you think?