Quiddity of Truth in nature.

Existence of truth.

This archetypal is author's own fallacy of fantasy, yet criticisms are embraced.

We are kissed by every word; we speak everyday, be it truth or a lie. In this model person, A is the original holder of the truth but when it is bucked even from him to person B, there are some gush of truth. In other words, A couldn't wrench his lurking to deliver 100% of truth. The leakage could be explained by his forgetfulness, unwillingness, incapability of phrases, and carelessness. That is why a particular truth is truth is never conveyed fully to others even from the native holder of truth. So, in reality, the conveyance of truth ebbs in small doses further from B to C, C to D, and conclusively to person K, who is the last to receive it. At the level of person F truth is 50% just as lie, which is also 50%. At this particular point, they nullify each other make to make obsolete, so it is more like no truth is spoken. From F to K, there is no truth prevailing, although there is but diminishing fraction of truth.

For all intents and purposes, the percentage of truth by the time it reaches K becomes nil, indicating 0% of truth and 100% of bluffs at K. The bottom line is that if you are the first recipient of the truth, you might get 90% of it but not when you are the last to receive it, where the truth is 0% or even less.

1+1=1

Don't gift an egg to a Hen!

All of us in life at some point break down to this sheer conviction, whether or not we do calculatedly. It is not unusual to have seen masterly finished wrapping gifts while making it to ministers, actors, billionaires, lawyers, officers, doctors, and engineers. We all acknowledge that these subsets of people are well heeled, more than plenty not to need any such token, but to our shame, we shell out with a cute little smile in a face. In fact, it might be superior to the best we could incur.

On the contrary, why would anyone not want his or her fortune to flow to a hard up man instead? In this case, everything is unsubtle, the poor man as we know is in need of a big favor but not the minister, neither officers. There is a sincere dodging of application of logic, which we actually revive on everyday life. Clearly 1+1=2 but in this case, it is 1+1, which becomes 3 or more. Even if anyone wanted to sweeten up a poor fellow, he only would unshackle one-tenth of what he would otherwise lavish in a minister.

However, most of us are left without a return which ignites us and makes to hate them. If we are to ask, why? Again, the answer is same-they have enough for them; they don't value our goodies, which is why an egg-laying hen is not to be dished out with an egg. The extra egg is just a burden to the hen.

That is why we never should gift an egg to an egg-laying hen.