There are cases where it does hold. Trivially, if the wrongs are vastly out of proportion, someone is overreacting. For example, if you’re fixated on your phone, don’t look where you’re going and bump into me, that’s a mild wrong. If I respond by slapping the phone out of your hands and stomping on it, I’ve caused way more damage to you in retaliation.
But in the case at hand, I’m with you: An obnoxious statement designed to invalidate someone’s complaint countered by another obnoxious statement designed to invalidate the previous one, thus defending the original complaint, is perfectly acceptable. The point isn’t just obnoxion, but a counterargument.
All words are made up. That is a true statement, not ‘a wrong’ thing to say.
Just because it wasn’t polite doesn’t mean it’s wrong. You’re putting morals on how to correct people on a subject you don’t fully understand yourself.
Without additional explanation its dumb yeah. “All words are made up, these ones were simply made up after you stopped being interested in learning about anything new in the world.”
Agreed, one of those “technically correct but deliberately missing the point” statements. Not sure why you’re so heavily downvoted so I want to explain why I support your statement.
The original statement doesn’t suggest they fail to understand words are constructed for sharing meaning, it asserts that the statements don’t communicate anything useful because the speaker made them up.
The statement is wrong, it needs a response, but “all words are made up” is not a useful response. It’s technically correct but fails to meet the speaker halfway by understanding their position and building towards it. See also: “all lives matter.” Technically correct but not useful, and deliberately avoids trying to understand the speaker’s position.
And then they get real snippy when you say “all words are made up.”
deleted by creator
An obnoxious response to an obnoxious statement
deleted by creator
Did it ever hold true?
There are cases where it does hold. Trivially, if the wrongs are vastly out of proportion, someone is overreacting. For example, if you’re fixated on your phone, don’t look where you’re going and bump into me, that’s a mild wrong. If I respond by slapping the phone out of your hands and stomping on it, I’ve caused way more damage to you in retaliation.
But in the case at hand, I’m with you: An obnoxious statement designed to invalidate someone’s complaint countered by another obnoxious statement designed to invalidate the previous one, thus defending the original complaint, is perfectly acceptable. The point isn’t just obnoxion, but a counterargument.
deleted by creator
All words are made up. That is a true statement, not ‘a wrong’ thing to say.
Just because it wasn’t polite doesn’t mean it’s wrong. You’re putting morals on how to correct people on a subject you don’t fully understand yourself.
deleted by creator
Interesting how your upset at the true statement said sarcastically, not the misinformed, incorrect statement said sarcastically.
There’s a double standard you’re still holding on to here, and it isn’t about magic Internet points.
Without additional explanation its dumb yeah. “All words are made up, these ones were simply made up after you stopped being interested in learning about anything new in the world.”
Yet 100% true. And a cromulent response.
Agreed, one of those “technically correct but deliberately missing the point” statements. Not sure why you’re so heavily downvoted so I want to explain why I support your statement.
The original statement doesn’t suggest they fail to understand words are constructed for sharing meaning, it asserts that the statements don’t communicate anything useful because the speaker made them up.
The statement is wrong, it needs a response, but “all words are made up” is not a useful response. It’s technically correct but fails to meet the speaker halfway by understanding their position and building towards it. See also: “all lives matter.” Technically correct but not useful, and deliberately avoids trying to understand the speaker’s position.
Someone making the “made up words” argument in the first place doesn’t deserve to be met in the middle. By doing so gives them merit.
deleted by creator