• Jhex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Dude my point is as follows:

    • there is an exaggerated claim on the table
    • you can call it hyperbole, as it is, maybe even criticize it, and then move on a discuss the merits it stands on

    Instead, you call it hyperbole and proceed to explain why it’s hyperbole and refuse to discuss any merit. That is just being pedantic.

    OP: “so a priest and a rabbi walk into a bar”

    You: “no, I refuse to hear the joke because it’s extremely unlikely religious people of different denominations drink together at bars”

    Do you understand the concept of neuance or shades of grey or do you doggedly stick to black and white?

    I do, which is why, I understand calling the UK worse than Russia is hyperbole but still get the gist of the comment

    Must be blissfull to see the world with strict category boundaries…

    Are you talking about yourself? refusing to even acknowledge the gist of the OP comment because it is hyperbole and not a check list like the one you provided?