He specifically mentioned “in the context of the US”.

If he had been talking about any other English-speaking country, I’d say it would be somewhat irrelevant.

But it most certainly isn’t when talking about the US, especially southern US.

Well written. To add: “Boy” coming from a white person to a black man is even more offensive, what with all the chattel slavery history and whatnot.

Dude.

As a third-party to this conversation, I have to say that the dude writing “There is often a gap between common-use language, and the academic function of words (see “racism”). This is why I emphasized the relation of the definitions I provided to the fields of anthropology and sociology, as well as why I stated it is a use almost exclusively found, in my experiences, in academia.” seems a tad more credible than the one writing “I’m not superior just because I used a dictionary to quash the logical fallacy of your call to authority.”

I seriously think you just missed the nuance he was trying to emphasise, and you started mansplaining something he already implicitly had agreed on. Now you’re going for these rather immature “logical fallacy” arguments. Just a tip for that, btw, to up your game in that aspect. Naming fallacies to implicate that the other person is wrong is actually something called “the fallacy fallacy”, ie "because their logic contains a fallacy, the conclusion must be false. That in itself is a fallacy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy

So yeah. You’re not wrong, but you’re also not right in correcting him in any way, and he’s not wrong to say that he is right.

I do believe he’s an English teacher. Just use your imagination a bit and think of how many of the things your English teacher told you didn’t seem to make sense, but when you actually dug into the material, you got an “aaa this is what he meant” - moment.

I literally laughed out loud. Well, not too audibly, but still. Forcibly exhaled, let’s say.

Amateurs.

It was the late nineties and info on such matters freely flowed on the net.

As opposed to?

Yeah I think the name sort of hints at that, for anyone using their thinking muscles

Well, there’s also a connection between Prometheus and Lucifer.

Prometheus brought fire. “Lucifer” means “light-bearer”.

Forethinkers are usually punished.

This is the sort of thing that I love reading on the internet.

Sorry to disappoint you, but most of that text is found offline — as it’s an excerpt from Douglas Adam’s “The Restaurant at the End of the Universe” (sequel to “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”). I probably should’ve attributed it.

If only doing things from the PoV of the speaker (you), that means 6~9 tenses for what most languages have 2 (past and non-past) or 3 (past, present, future).

And then you’d have to account who knows what, which version of a person you’re talking to. Say you’re having a conversation with someone before traveling in time to a time in which they’ve not timetraveled, so it’s either their subjective past or future, but then you continue the conversation, so you’d have to account for both the speakers perspective and the person being spoken to, who would then be subject to two different tense “totalities” since the conversation with them would have been taking place in two different times at the same time.

I seriously suggest reading Douglas Adams and Terry Pratchett for that sort of thing. I used to use Pratchett books as a substitute for weed when I was a bit over twenty.

No, millennials with rich parents will inherit the Earth.

*tense marking is fun in time travel.

One of the major problems encountered in time travel is not that of becoming your own father or mother. There is no problem in becoming your own father or mother that a broad-minded and well-adjusted family can’t cope with. There is no problem with changing the course of history—the course of history does not change because it all fits together like a jigsaw. All the important changes have happened before the things they were supposed to change and it all sorts itself out in the end.

The major problem is simply one of grammar, and the main work to consult in this matter is Dr. Dan Streetmentioner’s Time Traveler’s Handbook of 1001 Tense Formations. It will tell you, for instance, how to describe something that was about to happen to you in the past before you avoided it by time-jumping forward two days in order to avoid it. The event will be descibed differently according to whether you are talking about it from the standpoint of your own natural time, from a time in the further future, or a time in the further past and is futher complicated by the possibility of conducting conversations while you are actually traveling from one time to another with the intention of becoming your own mother or father.

Most readers get as far as the Future Semiconditionally Modified Subinverted Plagal Past Subjunctive Intentional before giving up; and in fact in later aditions of the book all pages beyond this point have been left blank to save on printing costs.

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy skips lightly over this tangle of academic abstraction, pausing only to note that the term “Future Perfect” has been abandoned since it was discovered not to be.

Killing Hans Sprechter

Been binging QI lately?

No such thing as a fish — QI

And remember that every second you’re under the hood looking at it, youre afraid of getting caught and sentenced for fiddling with cadavers without permission.

I had to look up the history and while it was illegal at points in history, anatomy theaters became popular in the 16th century.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_anatomy

The period I was thinking about was some British history, 17th-19th century, the bodysnatching thing.

One of the mods is an actual Russian troll. Davel@lemmy.ml

Pro-Russian mod who keeps pretending they’re not.

“If those kids could read…” meme would be fitting lol

“Low technology.”

I think of “low tech” as something that you could with some materials and knowledge do yourself out of a garage.

I would not take an improvised vaccine made in someone’s garage. Not until we were in real fucked up post-apocalyptic scenarios.

That’s a mighty fine argument there, buddy.

Correction, you’re now pretending as if you knew what an implication is the whole time, when you clearly didn’t. If you had done, you wouldn’t have written “those words don’t appear on the text”, as I was obviously writing down what the implication is, not directly quoting something. Ie, in other words, yes, it is unlikely that Trump will win, so in most cases, US won’t stop supporting Ukraine, but on the off-chance that the diapered orange clown wins, he definitely would bend over for Putler.

Removed by mod

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/implication