3 ms·

I infer from this you're saying "crap in one hand, wish in the other and see which fills up first"?

• throwanem 10y ago
  That's an unduly reductive take. A more accurate way to put it would be that, regardless of what should be the case, it's necessary to cope with what is.
  • deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  • inanutshellus 10y ago
    It's pretty impressive to be reductive against a post with no words! In all seriousness, it's a perfectly legitimate--albeit crass--interpretation, given the expressed intent (none). GGP says "these things ought to be true". Then there's a reply with a bare link saying, effectively, "is" statements are true, "ought" statements are fantasy/desire/normative. The rest of any kind of interpretation requires more context and intent.