• LemmysMum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      You believe that because your understanding of my position is incomplete and you have chosen this as the point to switch from comprehension to belligerence.

      • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        I feel the structure of my engagement was balanced and measured, as you moved from irregular terminology to outright hokem.

        What do you wish to achieve, by asserting that private property is ineradicable and also observed in rats?

        Who else shares such beliefs or perspective?

        • LemmysMum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          If you consider any of my terminology as irregular then I suggest you re-consume my existing comments with a dictionary on hand to assist your comprehension. Until you choose to meet me at a point of comprehension there is no point in further discussion, and asking disingenuous questions born of ignorance won’t yield useful answers.

        • LemmysMum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Who else shares such beliefs or perspective?

          I consider my statements to be objective fact communicated, to the best of my ability, accurately and specifically using socially agreed upon definitions as per the dictionary, ipso facto, I would argue that everyone who cares to genuinely understand and interpret what I’ve stated as intended would share this perspective given the capacity to comprehend it. Just as one understands gravity to the extent of their comprehension.