2:46 PM
@Ælis Well, depending on the absolute but subjective nature of "good", and how we begin to define it, not just abstractly in human societies but also pragmatically relevant in the current era of post-Modernism, followed by the more eminent yet more temporary enthusiasm of the masses in current . . .
I mean, I have good news but it's irrelevant or uninteresting.
@AGirlHasNoName wow, the sun is really far
@scohe001 That's supposed to be part of the encryption facepalm
I had to zoom to 400 percent to see the sun's face.
Is this how bacteria experience the world?
It's both underwhelming and overwhelming
I have my first on-topic discussion for this chat.
. . . Inorite, what is wrong with me. So
I was thinking about the nature of "rude". And "insults".
Would it be an on-topic Eeps question, or is it bound to get too philosophical?
Say, downvotes are insults to some people.
The idea is that, generally, if something is (1) directed at them, and (2) hurts their feelings, they perceive it as an insult.
(Some extra criteria are missing here, I keep thinking of some but none really fits or is general enough.)
Downvotes are just clicks of an arrow ultimately, purely mechanistic and devoid of feelings in themselves unless voters express them.
They are both directed at someone, and make them unhappy (in the sense that they would have been happier without them) This part is probably undeniable, that criticism impacts people, even for self-proclaimed Jeff Lebowskis.
We also know that something doesn't need to contain a specific set of words or language features to insult someone, even if most insults do follow certain patterns closely
Also basing the definition of perceived feelings, or the speaker's intentions, doesn't work. Too many cases where both would fail.
Thanks for listening! Stay tuned, and we'll be back after a bunch of inappropriate Google ads.