Why is it so easy to block people?

[Aethelwine]

---

Pie Serendipity wrote:

---

Aethelwine wrote:

 

Well your words tell a very different story.

---

By George she's got it!

My point is that EVERYBODY gets a different story from the same set of words. The writer is NOT responsible for the multiplicity of interpretations of the same words by a spectrum of readers from the semi-literate to the cognoscenti, and  from the stable to the wildly reptile-brained hyperemotionals.

And it is very apparent that your own perception, as evidenced by your posts, is jaded by an inferiority complex rolled up with a smidgeon of paranoia, covered with a gloss of denial. See, I can do the telepathic, remote layman's diagnosis of psychological deficiencies.

I, of course, revel in my entirely justified narcissistic superiority complex; it would be false modesty of me to admit to anything less. And you should really check out recent research that confirms my contention that psychopaths are actually even more empathic than the norm; the word you are clutching for is sympathetic, which is not an emotion I entertain for the weak, the gullible, the ignorant and the ingenuous. Pity, maybe.

 

---

The arguments and reasoning you have so far brought to bear in this thread fall a long way short of justifying your "narcissistic superiority complex". Hehe

 

It is kinda amusing reading your posts, rather like it is watching the antics of Stewie from the family guy,

I have not so far commented on the argument you keep presenting rather like a 3 year old proudly presenting the contents of their potty, because I did not seriously think you thought it in the slightest bit persuasive. After all if you believed that someone could never be held responsible for the consequences of what they said because meaning is derived solely through the listeners interpreation you would not even be attempting to communicate on a forum because you would know no one would understand your meaning. Although, it is a convenient excuse to consistently ignored what I have said, and make up what I have to respond to, For example taking me to have in some way to have addressed that argument (By George she's got it!). 

But since you do keep returning to it, i will comment. 

Whilst it is true that someone can cause an inadvertant reaction in someone by using a persoanl trigger word of some sort, perhaps relating to a phobia and could not be reasonably held responsible for the consequences of that, that is a highly unusual and exceptional example. 

Language is shared and it is because of that fact we can communicate with others through it. We are not in a sollipsistic world, there are other people out there and we do and can communicate with them. People can and should therefore be held accountable for saying things with intent to harm and hurt. That is not to say in all cases that that is a punishable act far from it sometimes a verbal boot up the proverbial is called for. It all depends on the circumstances and context. None of this is hard to understand, it doesn't require reference to linguistic philosophy or anything academic. It requires no understanding of psychopathy (where ever that came from). It is commonly understood and obvious, not really worth commenting on and why I didn't, until now. 

I doubt I can be bothered to respond further Mr Trololol, but I have kind of enjoyed your Stewie like forum persona.. So here is a song for you to sing along to and enjoy... 

[Pie Serendipity]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

 People can and should therefore be held accountable for saying things with intent to harm and hurt.

---

Yawn...give me a call when they have discovered the remote telepathic mechanism for determining "intent" by another across the worldwideweb.

Particularly since your argument defeats itself; if I, or anybody else, believes that it is impossible to hurt someone via the internet, then by no means can I be accused of any "intent to harm and hurt".

[Pie Serendipity]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

It is commonly understood and obvious

---

I have generally found that, when such a comment is made, it is as a consequence of no rational evidence having been presented to support the ridiculous opinion being expressed.

[Skylar Meridoc]

ok is there a MOD who can close this topic please? I was just asking a question, and never expected 100s of comments from everyone... i think its enough.