10 ms·
Your comment is a hasty generalization combined with a red herring. You don’t know that the author painted your generation with an overly broad and negative br
by antidesitter 7y ago
Your comment is a hasty generalization combined with a red herring.
You don’t know that the author painted your generation with an overly broad and negative brush. And even if he had done so, it wouldn’t render the article “pointless”.
- goodcanadian 7y agoYour comment is a hasty generalization combined with a red herring. As is the article. In my opinion, of course. That was sort of my point.
- antidesitter 7y agoWhere does the article engage in hasty generalization?
- goodcanadian 7y agoWell, the whole article reads like a hasty generalisation to me, but in an effort to avoid being trite . . . The author's generalisation is that society (i.e. everyone) doesn't respect authors over 70 and characters over 70 (and by extension, people over 70). Yet, he goes on to give examples of celebrated authors over 70 and celebrated stories where the main characters are over 70, leaving his argument where, exactly? I've no doubt that some "young" people disrespect "old" people simply because they are "old." By the same token, some "old" people disrespect "young" people simply because they are "young." This is nuts. Respect people who are worthy of respect regardless of age (conversely, sadly, many people don't do much worthy of respect, again regardless of age). Back to my original comment: can we just stop with this kind of generational pot shots?
- antidesitter 7y ago> The author's generalisation is that society (i.e. everyone) doesn't respect authors over 70 Nowhere does the author say that. Your whole comment is a strawman.
- goodcanadian 7y agoIf you say so . . . clearly, we took different meanings away from it.