Arguments are for children and those with the mental maturity of a schoolyard bully.
Conversations are where the mature people duke it out, and the point of a conversation is not to win but to see each other on equal ground, understand the position of the other party, and come to a conclusion that benefits both parties.
Journal of Semantics covers all areas in the study of meaning, with a focus on formal and experimental methods. It welcomes submissions on semantics, pragmatics, the syntax/semantics interface, cross-linguistic semantics, experimental studies of meaning, and semantically informed philosophy of language.
“When he was eating his juice and crackers at lunchtime, Jonathan enjoyed a little light reading.”
I have no idea how you and your other up voters read what I wrote and thought “semantics”.
Arguments are “I am right, you are wrong.”
Conversations are “I feel I am right, and you feel you are right. Let’s try to understand each other and figure out where the disconnect is and how we can meet on common ground to come to an outcome we are both happy with.”
There are nuances. Arguments have an undertone of superiority. Conversations have an undertone of trying to understand the other person’s perspective and realizing that if somebody has the same perspective as you then you wouldn’t be in the situation to begin with.
Now, I want to make it perfectly clear that there are some things where there is no room for conversation - things where facts are being disputed.
This post is an argument since I am too lazy to engage in conversation.
Arguments are for children and those with the mental maturity of a schoolyard bully.
Conversations are where the mature people duke it out, and the point of a conversation is not to win but to see each other on equal ground, understand the position of the other party, and come to a conclusion that benefits both parties.
so… semantics?
Semantics are for children. Straight up contradiction is where mature people say “No it isn’t” to each other to really practice being annoying.
https://academic.oup.com/jos?login=false
“When he was eating his juice and crackers at lunchtime, Jonathan enjoyed a little light reading.”
I’m glad there are people into that, but it sounds unbearable
I have no idea how you and your other up voters read what I wrote and thought “semantics”.
Arguments are “I am right, you are wrong.”
Conversations are “I feel I am right, and you feel you are right. Let’s try to understand each other and figure out where the disconnect is and how we can meet on common ground to come to an outcome we are both happy with.”
There are nuances. Arguments have an undertone of superiority. Conversations have an undertone of trying to understand the other person’s perspective and realizing that if somebody has the same perspective as you then you wouldn’t be in the situation to begin with.
Now, I want to make it perfectly clear that there are some things where there is no room for conversation - things where facts are being disputed.
This post is an argument since I am too lazy to engage in conversation.
deleted by creator