• PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    I didn’t disagree with them. At the same time, it shares a lot in common with religion. Both can be true at the same time

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      What they lack is a belief in something. It’s like someone who so hates tennis that not only do they not play they tell others not to play either

      You’re not going to call that person a tennis player

      • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I get that. I understand the analogy, and as an analogy, it’ll only get you so far. It’s hard to have a good faith (lol) discussion with you if you don’t actually read what I wrote; when you just repeat the same analogy that I already responded to, but with a different sport, you’re not helping me understand or telling me anything new.

        I agree I wouldn’t call them a tennis player, but I might call them an obnoxious spectator who streaks onto the court, smashes the rackets, punches the ref, and hurls insults at players. If you insist on continuing the silly stawman analogy, anyways.

        Edit: ok it wasn’t you who used the analogy before, it was someone else. But it’s such a common and silly analogy, you have to know it’s not really a good argument.