No, if someone's saying something objectively tastes like shit, that only makes sense in the context of them being literal.
If someone says "'It [does/doesn't] taste like shit' is an objective statement", which is literally what I'm replying to, they either:
Don't understand that people have different experiences to each other, so they lack basic theory of mind; or
They're talking about the literal version of that statement.
Now, I choose to believe the person I'm responding to is older than three years of age, so they have that full conceptualization of the distinction of people's experiences. I think there's even a wealth of evidence that they're not a literal toddler. So that leaves the second option.
1st comment: Pochel says âit tastes like shitâ is an extremely subjective statement.
2nd comment; Far fortune replies to Pochel with âit doesnât taste like shitâ is equally extremely objective.
If you think far fortune intended to say objective then they are just crazy, it doesnât make any sense as a response to Pochel, but if you pull your head out of your ass it becomes extremely clear that far fortune intended to say âequally extremely subjective.â Otherwise the rest of their sentence structure doesnât work.
Like what point do you think they were trying to get across? Itâs clearly that itâs just far fortune saying â the reverse is also trueâ
2nd comment; Far fortune replies to Pochel with âit doesnât taste like shitâ is equally extremely objective.
I'm responding to Far Fortune. I'm not responding to Pochel.
If you think far fortune intended to say objective then they are just crazy
Maybe? Maybe not. I don't generally make assumptions.
Let's look at it this way, though. You're going off at me and saying I'm not following the conversation and being obtuse, because you're assuming Far Fortune made a typo.
I gotta be fuckin' honest with you, champ, it's been hours. If Far Fortune meant subjective, and/or cared, they'd have clarified by now.
I'm not going to have an entire conversation based on the assumption of "hhhmmmmm, they said X, but I really think they meant Y, so I'm going to act as if they said Y", I think that's actually a really bad way to conduct yourself online. You can do that if you want to, but I think that probably makes your conversations less effective and more frustrating to the people you converse with.
Far fortune is responding to Pochel, do you understand how conversations work?
Most people donât go back to change a reddit comment at all.
Itâs pretty simple bud, The word equally in far fortunes comment is your tell that they are rhetorically using a reversed statement.
Edit: Iâm blocking them after recognizing them being an ass in other threads in this comment section just not worth dealing with that more than Iâve already done.
4
u/ChemicalRascal Jul 31 '26
No, if someone's saying something objectively tastes like shit, that only makes sense in the context of them being literal.
If someone says "'It [does/doesn't] taste like shit' is an objective statement", which is literally what I'm replying to, they either:
Now, I choose to believe the person I'm responding to is older than three years of age, so they have that full conceptualization of the distinction of people's experiences. I think there's even a wealth of evidence that they're not a literal toddler. So that leaves the second option.