Perhaps they genuinely thought I wasn’t aware that not everyone smokes weed, but it came across as though they were being defensive over something that was meant as a throwaway statement.
Rhetorical questions are fun to put together and also to tear down bad takes, but it takes a lot practice which is why debate clubs in schools and communities are so critical.
That isn’t saying the opposite though, it’s making a separate point altogether.
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, healthy discourse is far better than echo chambers, but I don’t think that nullifies the possibility that someone can choose to engage a person in debate for defensive reasons; I wasn’t looking to debate the existence of non smokers, or whether most smokers have a daily addiction or not, I was simply curious about how the sales work in Washington state.
Id say that by responding in such a manner, they are shutting down any discourse, rather than promoting questions. I genuinely was interested in how pricing and everything else worked, so whilst the question may have been rhetorical; the curiosity was sincere.
Perhaps they genuinely thought I wasn’t aware that not everyone smokes weed, but it came across as though they were being defensive over something that was meant as a throwaway statement.
Not defensive, I just enjoy answering rhetorical questions. It’s a hobby of mine.
Fuck yeah.
Rhetorical questions are fun to put together and also to tear down bad takes, but it takes a lot practice which is why debate clubs in schools and communities are so critical.
Pathos, logos, ethos, my dudes.
Exactly my point. Starting a debate over a comment is defensive in nature.
I’m literally saying the opposite.
People need to learn to debate ideas and digest imperfect expressions from others by engaging in curiosity, not judgement.
Ask more questions, assume less.
That isn’t saying the opposite though, it’s making a separate point altogether.
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, healthy discourse is far better than echo chambers, but I don’t think that nullifies the possibility that someone can choose to engage a person in debate for defensive reasons; I wasn’t looking to debate the existence of non smokers, or whether most smokers have a daily addiction or not, I was simply curious about how the sales work in Washington state.
Id say that by responding in such a manner, they are shutting down any discourse, rather than promoting questions. I genuinely was interested in how pricing and everything else worked, so whilst the question may have been rhetorical; the curiosity was sincere.
You do you mate; but I’d say there are better hobbies out there.
Besides, I never asked how many people smoked weed, so you weren’t answering a question at all, You were just being belligerent.