You get that, right Do you understand I'm talking about a completely commonsense, real-life problem here That there are plenty of situations where dogmatically saying 2+2 = 4 is a way for me to cheat you
-
-
The more general way to phrase what I'm talking about is "Weigh them all together" If the scale has a fudge factor then adding up separate results from it will make it worse But the "2+2=5" idea is absolutely an accurate way of describing it
8 replies 1 retweet 56 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @perdricof
Imagine opening up a street market with a scale like that.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Shit are you not aware that this is a real thing, that you always ask the person to weigh all the shit together if they can That weighing them separately (and rounding by a bit each time) and then summing them is a way to fuck you over
1 reply 3 retweets 39 likes -
Obviously not on a matter of whole pounds or kilos, but every little bit adds up, that's why they use a small scale and do a bunch of weighings Man no one ever actually taught you to shop at a street market huh
2 replies 1 retweet 31 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @perdricof
1) Your example is still more extreme than reality (actual scales). 2) we’re talking about people understanding the meaning of || || and ||||. Which you’re taking issue with.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Aya62335284 @perdricof
Well, I am stating that people do understand that meaning, it doesn't actually need to be "taught" in any meaningful way, and that people talking about complications or reframings of those symbols are doing something important and useful you stubbornly refuse to understand
3 replies 1 retweet 33 likes -
The tweet that spawned this is *literally* about, when someone says 2 + 2 = 5, if they're saying || || = |||, or basing it in something else. That would be that pesky "definitions and axioms" part. Y'know, as far as "what we're talking about".
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Actually, that was a framing imposed on a point that didn’t initially have that framing.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
I mean, the framing was a stupid incredibly general metaphor aimed at everyone James doesn't like, so it wasn't worth saying in the first place
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @Aya62335284 and
But to the extent what James meant was "Words have simple definitions, obvious truths don't need to be questioned, and anyone trying to complicate things is a bad actor who should be silenced", he's the ignorant asshole
1 reply 2 retweets 28 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Aya62335284 and
And even the metaphors he tries to use as sloppy rhetoric so he doesn't actually have to defend his beliefs ("Men have penises and women have vaginas!" as his equivalent of "2+2 = 4") don't actually hold up the way he thinks they do
1 reply 1 retweet 25 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.