3 ms·
A tyrant is just a ruler. > The discussion is what category AInfalls under. A tool or utility. A hammer drives nails into wood enabling construction far supe
by austincheney 8y ago
A tyrant is just a ruler.
> The discussion is what category AInfalls under.
A tool or utility. A hammer drives nails into wood enabling construction far superior to hands alone. A hammer can also crush skulls. A hammer is a utility. The determinate use is left to the user. The same objective reasoning applies to successful gun laws, which is often fatally missed by the gun lobby and advocates of gun restrictions.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 8y agoCheck any dictionary, except a 2000 year old Latin one. A tyrant is “a cruel and oppressive ruler” (Oxford American). Since you know that this is how the word has been commonly used for at least decades, and it is entirely clear from context that it was the intended meaning here, why do you feel it appropriate to waste everyone’s time with such a transparently bad-faith attempt to derail the discussion? Then, maybe, actually engage with the argument, instead of just restating its opposite without adding anything to support that viewpoint.
- austincheney 8y agoBecause in the context of the conversation (about a tool) whether or not a leader is cruel the result is still the same. Objectively, mean people do not define a tool's presence.