Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)OK
Posts
0
Comments
457
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • That seems like a silly hight bar. How about we throw in reading comprehension to the list?

    Lets compare:

    How do you know the force was appropriate

    I'll highlight important words for you:

    But if he was shooting pub goers then they could use appropriate force to stop him.

    Hope that helps you out.

  • I would imagine any group of people who are experiencing a genocide, to consider any group of people who are fighting against their oppressors, to be resistance movements. Likewise for any proponent of the interests of those committing the genocide, to consider any opposing group as terrorists, regardless of whose goals are advanced by the group existing.

    It's Israel committing a genocide. Hamas attacking Israel. And Palestinians being genocided.

    Focusing on the second part, and making a big deal of whether or not the subjective and pretty much meaningless "terrorist" label applies to Hamas, is what's gotten quite tiresome. It smells so much like the "🙉.... but do you condemn Hamas?"-rhetoric.

  • But... Maybe I'm the one being obtuse here. What was your point? Even though you pay for it either way, the difference for how that works out with taxes or direct expenses is the whole point of taxes

    When someone says "college is free in most of Europe". It's wouldn't be a counter argument to say "well, it's not free is it, because its paid for with taxes". The people who would (without it being "free"), need to pay for college themselves, are not in the position to possibly cover that cost (college funds are irrelevant). But, since a skilled labour force is important and a value to society, it should be covered by everyone.

  • My impression of linuxmemes (what's the lemmy word for subreddit?) is mostly that it feels like the regular posters don't use Linux. Either that, or it is automated and reposting stuff from 10-20 years ago that isn't very accurate or relevant.

  • Again. You have an impressive ability to not state a single accurate argument.

    Using the names of mental disorders as playground insults is disrespectful and irresponsible.

    Invalid basis. That a negative character trait can in severe cases be a disability, does not mean that the negative character trait is. Nor is it a correct assumption that all uses of said character trait (adjective or noun form), implies the severity to be diagnosed as a disability. Even otherwise positive traits can be disabilities if they are in excess as to be disability. It really is as simple as that.

    And if you say that narcissism as an insult is an established term

    First, I have not said that. So again, invalid premise. Secondly, no one so far used narcissism "as an insult", but as a descriptive word. Which is more or less the function of language and words. The assumption that people meant to insult, and not be accurate, is on you.

    I'll remind you that it got that way because people used the name of a disorder as an insult. As a slur.

    Remind me of what now? Words for character traits exist. If a person has trouble remembering stuff, you might be "forgetful". If it is so severe that it impacts their quality of life, then it might be diagnosed as a disorder. Saying a person is forgetful doesn't mean it is used as an insult.

    And no, the insult isn't drawn directly from greek mythology, because Greek mythology has the name Narcissus, not the noun narcissist. The noun narcissist was coined by psychologists talking about pathology.

    Thanks for the etymology lesson. I think your argument is that if you use words that stem from psychology, coined to describe a type of character/personality, and that if the trait, if sufficiently severe is considered a disorder, that one cannot (should not?) be used it the same way as defined by psychologists? That's... Why wouldn't one be allowed to use words for the generally understood meaning of the words?

    When a psychologist gives a person the diagnosis for having a disability as a result of "narcissism". They don't give the diagnosis as "narcissist". The diagnosis is called "narcissistic personality disorder".

    You know why they add the last word of "disorder"? Because narcissist/ic is already described, and when it is diagnosed as a disorder, they call it a disorder.

    A psychologist might not be comfortable with, or even use the somewhat reductive "a narcissist". But it's fine to use colloquially.

    I've met plenty of people with varying degrees of narcissistic traits. When people sometimes refer to them as "a narcissist", they are being somewhat reductive. But seldom, if ever, has it been used as an insult for the sake of insult. And generally describe... Well, you can lookup the behavioural commonalities. I wouldn't say any one of them had it as a personal disability. And they all ranged somewhere from "you like to share the view from your perspective a bit much" to "self centered asshole".

    Anyways. You caught me in a moment of being stuck, with nothing to do. I generally don't think this is worth while. Mostly good intentions tho, if you can believe it. Also in part enjoying to point out when people are being shit at forming an argument.

  • When being "narcissistic" is a diagnosis, because it causes impairment, then it is a disability. But that's not saying more than what a disability is. You can still be a narcissistic asshole (and oh boy are those two correlated!), without it being a disability to the individual.

    The fitting technical word for narcissism being a disability in/to the context of society or social group is the "asshole" part.

  • Narcissism and assholery are not mutually exclusive. Same goes with with being a victim of abuse. Nor is it considered being disabled. Nor is there basis to assume the person you replied to hates disabled people.

    Just wanted to chime in to point out that not a single thing you said is accurate. Which is somewhat impressive.

    In any case, a common trait of being a narcissist is martyrdom. I suspect I'll get something to that effect.

  • Also. MacOS is absolute garbage. I've used it for 4 months now, and it pisses me off how inconsistent it is, and poorly designed and written. Two days wasted because of an almost bricked laptop because the monitor was set to 60Hz while installing an update. Just think about that.

    I also had the misfortune of booting into windows after changing a motherboard. It was an absolute shit show there too, with broken drivers. Two hours of debugging. Had to use a long ethenet cable to even start fixing it, a flashback to a Linux experience I had in 2007.

    Same system in Linux? Not a single second spent. WiFi drivers, microcode. Everything worked fine. Only thing necessary was fixing the grub/mbr partition that Windows decided to write over, on a separate drive. But that's also Microsoft being shit.

    People just don't know how much more usable Linux is these days. Especially for power users. You can do so many things, so easily, that either works out of the box, or you can do with simple scripting. The only issue is software availability, but that too is mostly a thing of the past, and not really a fault of the OS.