@Sprite Trans people wear and need a lot of makeup. To, you know, feel like themselves. Not wearing makeup hurts their mental health. Have you ever thought about that?
@Sprite And besides, what even counts as “makeup”? A lot of things *you* do as a daily routine could be just as well considered “makeup”.
What is “illusion”? A lot of things you interact with on a daily basis is an “illusion”. “Illusions” and imagined constructs make up our whole society. They are our superpower as a species, you don’t want the world without them, just trust me.
I mean, if we’re supposed to debate the meanings of words we can look up in a dictionary, how could we do anything, let alone build a country? That’s the kind of sophistry some corporate lawyer would do.
A lot of things we don’t do because we can do them, but because we can’t not do them.
Given time and population, you’ll build some kind of country, whether you want it or not.
As for “meaning of words we can look up in a dictionary”… My dear, you haven’t worked with language long enough to see what I’ve seen. And let me tell you, dictionaries have more contradictions than any text you can dig up. And that’s completely normal. Because this is also what we can’t not do, because there’s a giant hole at the bottom of all definitions, because the world is an incomprehensible mess, and always will be.
Shit, we can even barely answer basic questions like “what the fuck the colour orange is?”
@pinkdrunkenelephants Somewhat common context and somewhat overlapping experience (both personal and third-party). The overlap is never 100% though. Ask three people, what something is, you’ll get four answers. No matter who they are.
I don’t know what you mean by context. Define context please. What do you mean by overlap? How do you define people? What does experience mean? What’s a “though”? Isn’t that that thing you make bread out of?
People can arbitrarily dispute the meaning of any word in bad faith. That’s what bad faith arguing general entails. To have any system, we have to assume everyone involved is working in good faith, and to help foster that we have objective, authoritative standards for what words mean, like dictionaries.
The fact that a lot of our lives is based on context and collectively shared, but not articulated understandings of such things serves the point I’m making far more than defeats it. That context is why we don’t allow people to dispute the meaning of words, especially basic words – we already know what those words mean, otherwise we couldn’t talk about anything at all, it’s how humans are hard-wired. Any genuine dispute can be solved with a dictionary no matter how flawed or imperfect they may be.
Allowing people, corporations really, to dispute basic terms is one of the means by which they destroyed our legal system from the inside, and why so many people have put so much thought into how they personally would form a new system to begin with – because we all see the rot and want out.
I do know a lot of trans people as well. And they DO want to alter their appearance to feel better. And they do exactly that. Who are you to tell them otherwise? I’m not trying to make “your” trans people to wear makeup, why should you ban makeup for the “mine”?
What’s weird is attempting to ban alteration of one’s appearance. This is overbearing, futile, and simply not reasonable.
For fuck’s sake, will you ban performance art like theatre and cinema as well?
deleted by creator
@Sprite Trans people wear and need a lot of makeup. To, you know, feel like themselves. Not wearing makeup hurts their mental health. Have you ever thought about that?
@pinkdrunkenelephants
@Sprite And besides, what even counts as “makeup”? A lot of things *you* do as a daily routine could be just as well considered “makeup”.
What is “illusion”? A lot of things you interact with on a daily basis is an “illusion”. “Illusions” and imagined constructs make up our whole society. They are our superpower as a species, you don’t want the world without them, just trust me.
@pinkdrunkenelephants
I mean, if we’re supposed to debate the meanings of words we can look up in a dictionary, how could we do anything, let alone build a country? That’s the kind of sophistry some corporate lawyer would do.
@pinkdrunkenelephants Y’see…
A lot of things we don’t do because we can do them, but because we can’t not do them.
Given time and population, you’ll build some kind of country, whether you want it or not.
As for “meaning of words we can look up in a dictionary”… My dear, you haven’t worked with language long enough to see what I’ve seen. And let me tell you, dictionaries have more contradictions than any text you can dig up. And that’s completely normal. Because this is also what we can’t not do, because there’s a giant hole at the bottom of all definitions, because the world is an incomprehensible mess, and always will be.
Shit, we can even barely answer basic questions like “what the fuck the colour orange is?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WX0xWJpr0FY
What we can do, is define words from context to context and hope to navigate those contradictions.
What matters in the end is, if we’re at all better of for the way we navigate, or worse. It’s the only thing that matters, really.
Oh, really?
How are we having this conversation then?
@pinkdrunkenelephants Somewhat common context and somewhat overlapping experience (both personal and third-party). The overlap is never 100% though. Ask three people, what something is, you’ll get four answers. No matter who they are.
I don’t know what you mean by context. Define context please. What do you mean by overlap? How do you define people? What does experience mean? What’s a “though”? Isn’t that that thing you make bread out of?
People can arbitrarily dispute the meaning of any word in bad faith. That’s what bad faith arguing general entails. To have any system, we have to assume everyone involved is working in good faith, and to help foster that we have objective, authoritative standards for what words mean, like dictionaries.
The fact that a lot of our lives is based on context and collectively shared, but not articulated understandings of such things serves the point I’m making far more than defeats it. That context is why we don’t allow people to dispute the meaning of words, especially basic words – we already know what those words mean, otherwise we couldn’t talk about anything at all, it’s how humans are hard-wired. Any genuine dispute can be solved with a dictionary no matter how flawed or imperfect they may be.
Allowing people, corporations really, to dispute basic terms is one of the means by which they destroyed our legal system from the inside, and why so many people have put so much thought into how they personally would form a new system to begin with – because we all see the rot and want out.
@pinkdrunkenelephants Hmm… How to put it simply.
The entirety of connections between different entities surrounding an entity in question. I’d put it this way.
deleted by creator
@Sprite Foundation of what?
I do know a lot of trans people as well. And they DO want to alter their appearance to feel better. And they do exactly that. Who are you to tell them otherwise? I’m not trying to make “your” trans people to wear makeup, why should you ban makeup for the “mine”?
What’s weird is attempting to ban alteration of one’s appearance. This is overbearing, futile, and simply not reasonable.
For fuck’s sake, will you ban performance art like theatre and cinema as well?
That is not okay, you should not be given power.
Removed by mod