2 ms·
The way I read it, the joke is just owning the insult in a good way. It works here on multiple levels, because first, owning the insult is not expected, so tha
by npteljes 1y ago
The way I read it, the joke is just owning the insult in a good way.
It works here on multiple levels, because first, owning the insult is not expected, so that's already a surprise, which can work as a joke.
Then, by actually admitting to the many bad classes, it signals that the author can actually tell good from bad, implying knowledge about the matter after all, refuting the argument in the insult (that he is bad in philosophy because he had bad philosophy classes).
Third, it's a very short, snappy response, in vein of the insult, making the author look competent.
- zzbzq 1y agoFirst guy says something about philosophy. Second guy says he's had a bad philosophy class, implying it's a bad, naive, amateur, or uninformed take on the philosophical subject at hand. First guy says he's had many, implying he's actually studied philosophy extensively, perhaps majored in it in college or obtained a degree, refuting the idea that the original take was amateur or uninformed.
- watwut 1y agoBut it is not funny. It is not a joke. It is just not engaging with the implied "you do not know what you talk about here" ... which is entirely valid, but not exactly a joke.
- npteljes 1y agoWe can't know if it was a joke or not, but comes across as someone trying to be funny.