>What can be asserted without evidence can be dissmised without evidence
should also apply to
>what can be asserted in methaphor can be dissmised in methaphor
>What can be asserted without evidence can be dissmised without evidence
>What can be asserted without evidence can be dissmised without evidence
should also apply to
>what can be asserted in methaphor can be dissmised in methaphor
Can you provide a metaphor? I don't understand.
lets see, if someone were to explain comunism good via metaphor:
>Instead of letting the rich eat from the pizza first, we divide it and share the pizza
another metaphor can be used to dismiss them:
>But if we just make more pizzas then thats not a problem
But what if the rich take all the new pizzas? Or what if the rich take all the pizza and instead let the workers just drink soda, which has the effect of malnourished them and depriving them of the type of thriving life their parents and grandparents used to have when they at least got some of the pizza? Metaphors can go on and on and on so it's hard to close the case on them.
exactly, wich is why they must be dismissed via methaphor, and completely ignored in rational discussion
>The rich cant possibly eat that much pizza, as long as we make more pizza we wil eventually outpace their hungry bellies
>The rich can't eat that much pizza
The rich would rather burn the pizza to enjoy the flames than share what they've convinced themselves is THEIR pizza. Have you ever talked to people in the rich circles? They constantly talk about how wage earners demand more pizza than they deserve.
wow, then lets keep feeding them pizza until their houses burn down, the good rich who shared pizza will survive while the bad rich wont. accelerating their burning with more pizza hmmm that reminds me of something
Pizza, unfortunately, seems to become more concentrated the more pizza that is present. Thus, those who share their pizza end up with less overall pizza, and those that selfishly keep or burn their own pizza accumulate more pizza.
but wouldnt that also happen if we share the pizzas among everyone? how is that different from just letting the rich have the pizza, at least that way someone has any pizza at all. Or should one just take all the pizza?
The point is previous generations had more pizza in a substantial way. But the pizza is being siphoned towards the centers of pizza and the average person who in previous generations could have had a healthy amount of pizza have to make do with less and less, even while the total pizza production has skyrocketed. This indicates the mode of pizza distribution is wildly flawed and corrupted.
does it? or does it indicate a disparity among the growth of hungry bellies versus the growth of big pizza rich populations?
if less pizzaless people were born id bet the pizza flow would change
I think we've reached the end of the usefulness of this metaphor because I don't even know what you were meaning to say with this post.
i meant to say growth of hungry population makes pizzas need more dividing while the amount of pizza remains roughly the sane
The same populations doing the same amount of work used to get more pizza even though the total pizza in existence was lower. Now people work harder for less pizza even though there is exponentially more pizza in existence.
not at all, while the total quantitative value of pizza has grown significantly, the real amount of pizza has not grown as fast. The pizza your fathers recieved is divided upon your brothers
its resources you stupid moron. come on, show me a real metaphor
>he who smelt it dealt it theory of literature
Brainlet here. What is the evidence that "what can be asserted without evidence can be dissmised without evidence"?
ethos: its said by a funni literature guy
pathos: doesnt it feel unfair to do a lot of work for someone who wont grab evidence?
logos: if claim A does not follow from an axiom or from induccion of case A, B and C, then it is irrelevant as a claim, it lacks logical integrity and would only lead us onto fallacy
None of that has any evidence, does it?
indeed, and you can dismmiss it with logos alone. so go ahead
>OP is a moron who thinks replacing the word money with pizza is a metaphor
So are we reverting to the old chan lingo of pizza being CP or what? Unsure why this thread is in this board. As far as I can see no literature is being brought up
i am proposing metaphor to be its own rubric of rhetorical analisis. its as lit as it gets
Nah it’s another moronic off topic thread
>but he wrote a heckin book!!
Ok. Then discuss it
>rhetorical analysis is not lit
you will never be IQfy
homie, you are making elon musk threads. You have no room to criticize anyone
It’s “metaphor” not “methaphor”
I couldn’t understand what he was saying as he was slobbering all over Nelson Mandela wiener