Sure, but maybe the article just has bad examples. I suffer from being too logical. I&#x27;m a software person, and have many times told my friends to pretend I&#x27;m a computer, simply because I just don&#x27;t want to enter their world of illogical thinking. Things like &quot;it&#x27;s the same difference&quot;, for example, mean two things are the same, so there is NO difference! It&#x27;s not the same difference (this implies there is one), there is NO difference. Anyway, in the end, I can see language is simply a tool, in which words and phrases take on different meaning depending on the context. To effectively communicate, it&#x27;s important to see this context, which includes the _intentionality_ of the communicators. What did that person __mean__, when they said XYZ.<p>I understand the article was about that, but I guess it gave bad examples. When the therapist asks &quot;are you absolutely sure..&quot;, the therapist is not asking to predict the future. She is simply asking if you are 100% confident with your current knowledge, and assuming no unforeseen circumstances, that you will not harm yourself. It&#x27;s actually logically sound. You can be absolutely sure, because it&#x27;s qualifying your confidence in YOUR thinking. You can be absolutely sure of something and still be wrong. So the author wasn&#x27;t even pedantic enough! Regardless, it was easy to simply ask what the therapist meant, and avoid whatever came after. But I guess the author of the article is also not a native English speaker, which I think is really the cause here, not that she&#x27;s &quot;academic&quot;.