Yes literally always? Doing something wrong because someone does something wrong doesn’t make your wrong action morally right. They don’t cancel into a positive.
We can understand why people do wrong things, been be sympathetic, but it doesn’t make the action good.
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.
Oh please are you seriously pretending that was meant to be informative? It was 100% snark and meant to be retaliatory. Don’t play dumb to score magic internet points. You’re not dumb. I know you aren’t.
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.
Both are. The first is obviously worse of course lol. Man didn’t realize this would upset so many people. Clearly the first person is worse. The response is also just kind of snarky and annoying.
As I said in another comment that’s just rolling in the mud with pigs. Hit them back with information or if you want to be petty but not the same, just make it a point to call out their ignorance.
Normally I’m all about education, but I know a lost cause when I see one. A person like that probably won’t be persuaded by information. By telling them that all words are made up, you’d be applying the snark you consider fine.
How is telling someone that all words are made up, not just the ones they are angry about, not calling them on their shit in a real way? In cuts straight to the point and is undeniably factual. It can turn to more conversation on the topic if it’s worth the effort. As science progresses, people make up words to explain new discoveries, so all words are made up.
Treating someone like a child that’s acting like a child is how to deal with children.
Dogpiling, sure, but not playing dumb. If someone uses a bullshit argument like, “those are made up words” you shut that down by saying “all words are made up”. It’s completely indefensible and true.
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.”
I mean it is an obnoxious thing to say lol
An obnoxious response to an obnoxious statement
Did we not learn “two wrongs don’t make a right” in kindergarten or something?
Did it ever hold true?
Yes literally always? Doing something wrong because someone does something wrong doesn’t make your wrong action morally right. They don’t cancel into a positive.
We can understand why people do wrong things, been be sympathetic, but it doesn’t make the action good.
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.
Oh please are you seriously pretending that was meant to be informative? It was 100% snark and meant to be retaliatory. Don’t play dumb to score magic internet points. You’re not dumb. I know you aren’t.
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.
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.
And the thing it’s a response to isnt?
Both are. The first is obviously worse of course lol. Man didn’t realize this would upset so many people. Clearly the first person is worse. The response is also just kind of snarky and annoying.
That’s the point. Pretend that my problems don’t exist? Get your bullshit thrown back at you.
As I said in another comment that’s just rolling in the mud with pigs. Hit them back with information or if you want to be petty but not the same, just make it a point to call out their ignorance.
Normally I’m all about education, but I know a lost cause when I see one. A person like that probably won’t be persuaded by information. By telling them that all words are made up, you’d be applying the snark you consider fine.
Which is the point of it. Be a jerk, get a snarky and true response.
Just call them on their shit in a real way. Why play in the mud with a pig? Point out they simply aren’t learned enough, that’s plenty lol
How is telling someone that all words are made up, not just the ones they are angry about, not calling them on their shit in a real way? In cuts straight to the point and is undeniably factual. It can turn to more conversation on the topic if it’s worth the effort. As science progresses, people make up words to explain new discoveries, so all words are made up.
Treating someone like a child that’s acting like a child is how to deal with children.
I know you know the answer to this but yall are having too much fun dogpiling as you play dumb, so go ahead and enjoy yourself 👍
Dogpiling, sure, but not playing dumb. If someone uses a bullshit argument like, “those are made up words” you shut that down by saying “all words are made up”. It’s completely indefensible and true.
What do you think that response does?
More substantive than the alternative
Such a boomer response.
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.
Yeah that basically sums it up. Whatever it’s all magic internet points lol