Didn't mean to hurt your feeling!

What is wrong with this statement?

Either you meant what you said or you are not able to say what you mean.
1) If you meant what you said then why being apologetic?
2) If you meant what you said and then felt guilty then you must admit it. Do it in an honest manner. Nothing hurts others as much as dishonesty. Nothing takes away from your social image more than dishonesty. People are very well equipped to detect dishonesty.
3) The second point applies also if you exactly meant what you said and you are not feeling guilty, but just trying to be a smart ass.
4) If you are unable to say what you mean then start by avoiding the expression "Didn't mean to hurt your feeling"! It's not going to help you. It's only going to affirm the state of a mutual indignation between you two. Thus, making both of you feel uneasy!

What to do? Make up for it by action and never try to resolve the issue on rational grounds. This are all assuming that you are not a fool to begin with!

Why truth did not prevail? The triple-F factor

Factuality: a necessary condition to stay truthful is to keep track of facts and stay faithful to them.

Fallibility: human beings make mistakes. Furthermore, they often find it more convenient to hide their fallibility from others, or rationalize their mistakes, or to blame others for their own wrong doings.

Friendliness: social life requires collaborating with others to achieve common goals or to compromise over incompatible objectives. Friendship by definition requires being biased with respect to certain individuals, thus, manipulating facts to their advantage. (1)

Looking at the state of affairs, evolution is telling us that there are other qualities that take precedence over truthfulness. These qualities equipped our ancestors to cope with the complications of living in groups.

So, why do we emphasize being truthful over being socially compatible? Is it simply a byproduct of the moral codes handed down to us by religion and philosophy? I have an alternative hypothesis: "Knowing that the other person is truthful helps us to lie better."

1) there is a 4th factor that I'm withholding from you. Is that considered not being truthful?

I have a quote on my Blog that goes like this: “If you wonder then ponder and never settle on the obvious the world will be a better place!” What I did not mention is what happens to you! The answer is that you go crazy, or at the very least you’ll find yourself belonging to a very tiny minority that is often being ostracized by the masses.

I really liked the Video and envy you guys for couple of reasons: Having a platform (videos) to express your ideals and aspirations is essential to coping with the contradictions that you encounter as a youth in today’s world. In addition, it seems like being in Vancouver also helps by being exposed to a wider range of people including (hopefully) more open minded .... That’s one of the reasons I’m looking forward to moving to Boston at the end of August; I'm being rotten in ...!

As far as the “harmony of science and religion” and the concept of “independent investigation of truth” are concerned, I have not yet figured them out! The first statement seems like a paradox if not an oxymoron! Religion is based on faith and science is never based on faith. The second statement concerns itself with “truth”, which in the context of religion means the “religious truth”. What if you conduct an “independent investigation of truth” and come at the conclusion that there is no absolute truth and religion is just man’s best attempt (as apposed to a divine intervention) to explain/mitigate the cause of his misery and ignorance? What if you conclude that having no religion is better for the mankind?

Maybe that’s the case, but you can’t go to a religious person and tell her on the face that he or she believes in superstition! That’s what I like about your video: it draws examples from science to educate people about tolerance and “independent investigation of truth”, and it does it in a non-invasive manner!

Best of luck!