• FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    How dare I "missuse" dictionaries to "define words" which contradict your "alternative facts."

    and FYI, Oxford is British.

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]
      ·
      9 months ago

      Dictionaries do not exhaustively discuss topics and the scope of meanings of terms, they give you a colloquially-oriented summary of what they mean to help you, for example, parse a conversation that uses the word in passing.

      John Locke being a liberal isn't an "alternative fact", you're just a troglodyte.

    • JuryNullification [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      nerd I read a dictionary entry and maybe skimmed a Wikipedia article and thus am an expert and qualified to discuss things I’m wholly ignorant of.

      I. NO INVESTIGATION, NO RIGHT TO SPEAK

      Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn't that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak? Quite a few comrades always keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense, and for a Communist that is disgraceful. How can a Communist keep his eyes shut and talk nonsense?

      It won' t do!
      It won't do!
      You must investigate!
      You must not talk nonsense!

      Please. I’m begging you. Go to your local community/junior college, find a class in Philosophy and enroll in it. Take a class in political science. Engage in these subjects deeper than surface level. Actually try to internalize and understand these subjects. It will improve your life in many ways.

    • Egon
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      deleted by creator