You must log in or # to comment.
It’s purely anecdotal and I’ve nothing to back this up, but 90% of answers to a debate that starts with “so…” are poorly constructed, cherry pick arguments, and have little understanding of the context of the discussion.
It’s infuriating.
So you’re saying we piss on the poor?
So you’re saying all arguments phrased otherwise are solid?
So it is ok to claim something with nothing to back it up?
So what are you trying to say?
Also gotta love the dummies that invariably respond with, “lol nobody does that” when you explain it to them.
lol nobody does that
So you hate potatoes??
Dydde Shackethpear knoweth aboute ye humbleth potateth? Methinkth hee didtht pothiblie notte.
The “So doth hates potatoes?” quote confused me because there’s no pronoun (doth is a verb)
It should be more like “So thou hatest potatoes” or something
Thouest dothest hatest potatoeseth?
Doth thou hate potaters sounds right
I’m not a linguist, and the timeline here is vague, but two things:
- We’re in the second-person singular, so “dost”, not “doth”
- Using the auxiliary verb (“do-support”) is a fairly modern construct at least in written English; “hatest thou” would be more likely.
Pretty much Lemmy when one leftist criticizes the strategy of the left. “Oh dissent? You must be MAGA!”
you are criticizing something from lemmy? are you some sort of MAGA lib?
Even worse: a lib.
Now I’m laughing at my friend group from when we were teenagers.
One proclaimed that they weren’t a fan of breasts with tiny little nipples.
He was immediately branded as the guy who loves huge dinner plate sized nipples.
There was no in between for us back then.
Uh… forsooth?
It’s a classic debate rhetoric (with no argumental value) that is a staple since classic ancient times.
Should we have outgrown it by now?
Perhaps it (& similar stuff) is holding us back?In science (but not necessarily scientific community) such things have no place.
It barely has a place in philosophy.
