4 ms·

People seem to think that EITHER Republicans OR Democrats are terrible. They forget that it's politicians regardless of political leanings that are corrupt and

People seem to think that EITHER Republicans OR Democrats are terrible. They forget that it's politicians regardless of political leanings that are corrupt and disgusting. Very prominent Democrats could easily order those advanced DNA tests that could offer justice, but they don't care about justice, they care about personal convenience. I have no doubt Republicans in exactly the same situation would behave exactly the same. It's horrible that this is occurring and there is nothing we can do about this except vote out these politicians.

saghm 8y ago
> People seem to think that EITHER Republicans OR Democrats are terrible OT, but I've always found it interesting that in English, "or" is often (and maybe even usually) implied to be "xor". Sometimes I joke that we should just call "xor" "or" and then rename the old "or" to "inclusive or".
- taeric 8y ago
  I think that is only the case when it is for something where you also have to be in one of the categories. For many people, it isn't A OR B. It is their group, or the other group. That is significant. Even many of the people that point out it can be both, typically identify as a third option. It isn't "my group can also be bad." It is "both of those groups could be bad." Where the talker is pointing from the outside.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >I think that is only the case when it is for something where you also have to be in one of the categories. For many people, it isn't A OR B. It is their group, or the other group. That is significant. You want coffee or tea?
    - taeric 8y ago
      Isn't that similar in that you join with one of the groups? I mean, yes, the language construct is clearly often used as an exclusive, but it is a language construct where context supplies a large part is the meaning.
      - coldtea 8y ago
        >Isn't that similar in that you join with one of the groups? The argument above was about emotional attachment to one's group though (that they can't fathom to identify as possibly also bad) -- here it's merely a preference or even just a casual order (just because when asked "X or Y" you ordered X over Y food for dessert this time doesn't mean you're an "X person").
        taeric 8y ago
        Ah, I see what you mean. I wasn't necessarily trying to index only on the emotional aspect of it. Though, I think I see how that is required for the way I framed it. So, to reframe. For the cases where it is completely "XOR", I think the emotional attachment matters a lot. For the others, I suspect it is more of a short circuiting behavior. "Coffee, tea, or soda?" I've often answered that with "Coffee and soda water, please." That or just stopped listening when they listed what I wanted anyway. :)
        saghm 8y ago
        > That or just stopped listening when they listed what I wanted anyway. :) I guess you'll never know if they actually said "XOR" or not then :)
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

saghm 8y ago

> People seem to think that EITHER Republicans OR Democrats are terrible OT, but I've always found it interesting that in English, "or" is often (and maybe even usually) implied to be "xor". Sometimes I joke that we should just call "xor" "or" and then rename the old "or" to "inclusive or".

taeric 8y ago
I think that is only the case when it is for something where you also have to be in one of the categories. For many people, it isn't A OR B. It is their group, or the other group. That is significant. Even many of the people that point out it can be both, typically identify as a third option. It isn't "my group can also be bad." It is "both of those groups could be bad." Where the talker is pointing from the outside.
- coldtea 8y ago
  >I think that is only the case when it is for something where you also have to be in one of the categories. For many people, it isn't A OR B. It is their group, or the other group. That is significant. You want coffee or tea?
  - taeric 8y ago
    Isn't that similar in that you join with one of the groups? I mean, yes, the language construct is clearly often used as an exclusive, but it is a language construct where context supplies a large part is the meaning.
    - coldtea 8y ago
      >Isn't that similar in that you join with one of the groups? The argument above was about emotional attachment to one's group though (that they can't fathom to identify as possibly also bad) -- here it's merely a preference or even just a casual order (just because when asked "X or Y" you ordered X over Y food for dessert this time doesn't mean you're an "X person").
      - taeric 8y ago
        Ah, I see what you mean. I wasn't necessarily trying to index only on the emotional aspect of it. Though, I think I see how that is required for the way I framed it. So, to reframe. For the cases where it is completely "XOR", I think the emotional attachment matters a lot. For the others, I suspect it is more of a short circuiting behavior. "Coffee, tea, or soda?" I've often answered that with "Coffee and soda water, please." That or just stopped listening when they listed what I wanted anyway. :)
        saghm 8y ago
        > That or just stopped listening when they listed what I wanted anyway. :) I guess you'll never know if they actually said "XOR" or not then :)

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]