Difference between revisions of "Talk:2592: False Dichotomy"
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
I’m pretty sure the cannibalism joke is based on the idea that we have to create a “false dichotomy” between humans and non-human living things, or else we can’t say that it’s okay to eat some things (maybe the line is drawn at plants, maybe at animals) but not others (a category that usually includes humans). [[User:Pablo360|Pablo360]] ([[User talk:Pablo360|talk]]) 19:03, 11 March 2022 (UTC) | I’m pretty sure the cannibalism joke is based on the idea that we have to create a “false dichotomy” between humans and non-human living things, or else we can’t say that it’s okay to eat some things (maybe the line is drawn at plants, maybe at animals) but not others (a category that usually includes humans). [[User:Pablo360|Pablo360]] ([[User talk:Pablo360|talk]]) 19:03, 11 March 2022 (UTC) | ||
:I don't think it's that specific. Often false dichotomies use something horrible or unthinkable as the alternative, and cannibalism is about as taboo as it gets. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) | :I don't think it's that specific. Often false dichotomies use something horrible or unthinkable as the alternative, and cannibalism is about as taboo as it gets. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : no, that's delving too far into a fairly simple joke. "Embracing dichotomies and Cannibalism" is a false dichotomy itself! He could have said anything "skydiving", "poison swallowing", anything... It's the fact it's a false dichotomy used to justify false dichotomies. GET IT?!?!? | ||
I think the title text joke is more based on "There are 2 hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-1 errors." [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 19:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC) | I think the title text joke is more based on "There are 2 hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-1 errors." [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 19:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 21:18, 11 March 2022
This is my second explanation ever, it probably isnt great but its good for others to have something to start from. if anybody who knows how to do the links and everything, for all of the characters and the fancy words, please do that. ElijahRock (talk) 17:57, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
And here I thought it was a pun on tracheotomy...
I’m pretty sure the cannibalism joke is based on the idea that we have to create a “false dichotomy” between humans and non-human living things, or else we can’t say that it’s okay to eat some things (maybe the line is drawn at plants, maybe at animals) but not others (a category that usually includes humans). Pablo360 (talk) 19:03, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think it's that specific. Often false dichotomies use something horrible or unthinkable as the alternative, and cannibalism is about as taboo as it gets. Barmar (talk)
- no, that's delving too far into a fairly simple joke. "Embracing dichotomies and Cannibalism" is a false dichotomy itself! He could have said anything "skydiving", "poison swallowing", anything... It's the fact it's a false dichotomy used to justify false dichotomies. GET IT?!?!?
I think the title text joke is more based on "There are 2 hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-1 errors." Barmar (talk) 19:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
