>>16
Alright, despite the subtle feeling that I'm feeding a troll, I'm going to attempt to tell you what you're talking about. For two logical systems to take in the same observations and spit out two different, yet correct, conclusions, then either:
1. There is no universal law.
or
2. They are the same conclusions, just warped in a manner that makes them unrecognizable to the other system.
Either way, there's nothing exceptional about what happens. If there's no universal law, then I suppose there never will be a right or wrong, and this argument is null. If the latter is true, then I've just repeated myself several times.