I think I get where you're coming from, but I differ in what I consider to be important. Saying "your idea is pure garbage" is honest (assuming that's what you

I think I get where you're coming from, but I differ in what I consider to be important. Saying "your idea is pure garbage" is honest (assuming that's what you think in your mind), but it isn't accurate enough. Preferably I'm as empirically truthful as well (as in: logic + experience) while doing my best to stay concise (I'm bad at that). A phrase like "pure garbage" has two elements of which one is very troublesome and the other is sometimes fine. The one that is sometimes fine is "pure garbage" is a metaphor. You now leave it on the listener to decode that metaphor. Why not be direct and say: "Your idea is too flawed." The one that I believe to be very troublesome is that it overgeneralizes its conclusion. Ideas are in almost all cases never pure garbage. I've never said that someone's idea is pure garbage (in a good faith discussion). I have said things like: your fundamental assumption of your idea is fundamentally flawed and therefore it's not worth for me to listen to this idea any further (e.g. when someone says I should look into astrology to fix my life problems -- family members are fun and I cut them off, I know it's rude -- even for Dutch standards but I'm tired of it).