Every slabbed card has a story, don't it?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You could say the same, probably, about any of those categories, but you are missing the point. The hobby defines alteration as intentional changes made to improve the appearance of cards. The card on the left is not altered.

Then why does PSA consider a card that was stored in a screwdown holder to be altered?

And why don't they consider a card that was soaked to remove glue and paper from a scrapbook to be altered?

This is my point. Their definitions are completely arbitrary. What is it that we actually care about?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Then why does PSA consider a card that was stored in a screwdown holder to be altered?

And why don't they consider a card that was soaked to remove glue and paper from a scrapbook to be altered?

This is my point. Their definitions are completely arbitrary. What is it that we actually care about?

As I said earlier, with the Socratic method you can show that virtually any definition or distinction does not hold up perfectly. I think the second one is probably an exception due to long established, well settled tradition. I don't know how to explain the first.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As I said earlier, with the Socratic method you can show that virtually any definition or distinction does not hold up perfectly. I think the second one is probably an exception due to long established, well settled tradition. I don't know how to explain the first.

+ the Socratic is about conceptual and fluid terms, like "justice", not redefining a clearly known word or pretending it does not mean what it has been widely used to mean. The Socratic doesn't pick apart every word ever used. If an argument hinges on pretending a word means the opposite of what the word has been commonly used to mean for decades, it is not a logical argument.