Someone who believes their “reasonable argument” is more reasonable than another person’s more reasonable reasonable argument.
In the dictionary next to Unreasonable Person it says “See Dryson”…
3 Likes
kek
+1
haha.
Sorry OP, I think that we just did this to your thread:
Can someone even say that some argument is more reasonable than other when we dont have definition of a reasonable argument?
1 Like
Well… it seems reasonable to say that seems to be true.
Bt what is the reason that makes you think so? Or is that unreason? How you know?
Exactly what was my point. Someone is being offensive on purpose, but not necessary offending.
The two terms have the same definitions in your link, which makes me think those links are bad.
When two terms have the same definition, it means
- they are to be used in different contexts
- they come from different language (eg english vs US - or Massachusetts vs Illinois )
I usually go with my gut. Sometimes it’s right, other times it turns out I just needed to have a poop.
But was it done on purpose? Maybe not. For example, I swear a LOT in person. ■■■■ is probably the most common word to ever exits my mouth. I do not say it to offend anyone, I use it simply because it’s habit. Some people find that word offensive, yet I did not say it with the intent of disparaging them nor did I say it with the intent of causing them offense. None the less, they can take offense without my intending to offend them.
Tell those people that they should find that word offending.
Calling it an offensive word is a offending misuse of the word offensive, be it on purpose or not.
To “take offense” is an action by the person , by which he assumes that an action which offended him was actually started with an offensive intent.
eg. My horse walks three times on your hand. You are offended by this action, however you can either consider that my horse has a very bad sight, or take offense of this action and consider my horse had an ill intent.
1 Like
And yet offensive as an adjective (which definitely fits my example):
causing someone to feel deeply hurt, upset, or angry.
Is loser offensive? I mean where are winners, there must be also losers, or am I wrong and everyone is a winner?
2 Likes
Actually it does. When these easy rules are too challenging then one cannot be good at EVE either.
nothing wrong with that imo.
maybe you have a reason to do it.
Maybe so, but the debate we’re having is about the intent. Was it intended to cause them offense, or did they simply take offense where none was intended?
that’s because the definition is bad.
“usage note”
The label Offensive is used in this dictionary to indicate that a particular term or definition is likely to be perceived as insulting by a listener or reader—an affront to that particular individual or to an entire group of like individuals—whether or not an offense was intended. Offensive is often paired with the label Disparaging used to indicate that those people who use the offensive term do so to offend intentionally.
Offensive is thus used when the known effect to make people take offense of the action implies that someone who uses it has the intent to harm.
Which means, when you use an offensive word, you know you will likely harm people. But that is only true on some places.
And yet, if I say ■■■■ during a course of normal conversation, I do so absent minded of the fact that some people may take offense. I do not consider the implication of that word before it is uttered. I may observe their reaction afterward and in hindsight know that it was offensive, however because I myself do not find the word offensive I do not generally consider the implications to others.
Thus, I have used an offensive term without actively knowing (before/during the utterance) that it would offend others.
that’s not the point.
you can make rules to obey ingame and you have to enforce them by yourself.
in high sec there might be concord but other than that concord wont bann your account if you gank someone.
there are exemptions if it comes to manipulating software wich is legally the property of ccp. but I don’t want to goo to deep into law,
my point is it should not effect your gameplay if I make death threats to you because I lost my hauler with all my possessing’s to you.
you might think im a total retard and in this case it might be a fakt.
but never then less it should not effect how ccp handles your account and bann it in instances.
this is the job of irl concord aka police to get behind that and if they think the threat is legit they will enforce law upon me.
non of ccps business since it doesn’t have anything to do with the legal rights ccp has.
That’s exactly the point. The game has a steep learning curve, has it not?
Another example. I’ll call this thought experiment Schrödinger’s Grandmother. Yes, he’s probably rolling over in his grave at such an obtusely incorrect usage of his thought experiment. Never the less, I feel like it is amusing.
I send a message electronically to one of two people. One of them is Schrödinger’s Grandmother, a proper lady who will most certainly take offense to the message, the other is a sailor (well known for swearing) who will undoubtedly not be impacted in the least. I am aware that one of them will be offended and one of them will not.
I don’t know which I sent it to, and I won’t know until I receive their reply. Have I caused offense?