3 ms·

I'm not sure I get your point. All your rhetorical questions could be asked the other way round.

by ant6n 11y ago

BillinghamJ 11y ago
The point is "why go with the harder option rather than the convenient option". It wouldn't really make sense to ask the other way around... "Why not hand wash clothes instead of using a washing machine? Because it's takes a long time and is physically demanding."
noxToken 11y ago
I read it as, "You have the ability to make certain aspects of your life easier or more convenient. Is there a reason to decline (whether personal, ethical, etc.) or are you just being obstinate?" The emphasis is on the trailing question. Do I need a smart phone? Not really, but the accessibility is nice. For others, the answer could be that certain aspects become more convenient, however, they find themselves glued to the phone for 75% of their waking hours. The trade off would be to get a dumb phone (or dataless smart phone) to maintain contact while cutting the screen time. Do I need a dish washer? No. I can do the dishes by hand. The dish washer will likely use less water and better sanitize my dishes. It's not a necessity, but it helps. Anecdote: I have an acquaintance who believes that the golden age of gaming started around the NES version of Mario and ended around DOOM. He keeps abreast of current game trends, but he refuses to buy anything modern if it is not a Mario title. He is certainly entitled to his opinion of what constitutes a "golden age", but I, as well as many others, believes that he is missing out on many titles that he would enjoy. Is he wrong? Absolutely not; he can play or not play whatever he chooses. Does it make sense? I don't think it does. He has firmly rooted himself into a niche of a hobby such that he lets everything else fly by without consideration. He's not wrong. He's just obstinate. For what gain?

3 ms·

I'm not sure I get your point. All your rhetorical questions could be asked the other way round.

by ant6n 11y ago

I'm not sure I get your point. All your rhetorical questions could be asked the other way round.

BillinghamJ 11y ago
The point is "why go with the harder option rather than the convenient option". It wouldn't really make sense to ask the other way around... "Why not hand wash clothes instead of using a washing machine? Because it's takes a long time and is physically demanding."
noxToken 11y ago
I read it as, "You have the ability to make certain aspects of your life easier or more convenient. Is there a reason to decline (whether personal, ethical, etc.) or are you just being obstinate?" The emphasis is on the trailing question. Do I need a smart phone? Not really, but the accessibility is nice. For others, the answer could be that certain aspects become more convenient, however, they find themselves glued to the phone for 75% of their waking hours. The trade off would be to get a dumb phone (or dataless smart phone) to maintain contact while cutting the screen time. Do I need a dish washer? No. I can do the dishes by hand. The dish washer will likely use less water and better sanitize my dishes. It's not a necessity, but it helps. Anecdote: I have an acquaintance who believes that the golden age of gaming started around the NES version of Mario and ended around DOOM. He keeps abreast of current game trends, but he refuses to buy anything modern if it is not a Mario title. He is certainly entitled to his opinion of what constitutes a "golden age", but I, as well as many others, believes that he is missing out on many titles that he would enjoy. Is he wrong? Absolutely not; he can play or not play whatever he chooses. Does it make sense? I don't think it does. He has firmly rooted himself into a niche of a hobby such that he lets everything else fly by without consideration. He's not wrong. He's just obstinate. For what gain?