4 ms·
In case of Asimov, forever. To flip your rhetorical trick against you: would it be ok if they did it 1 year after death? If no, then I'm "interested in more de
by kjksf 7mo ago
In case of Asimov, forever.
To flip your rhetorical trick against you: would it be ok if they did it 1 year after death? If no, then I'm "interested in more detail about when the odiousness crosses into being socially acceptable for you".
To expose your rhetorical trick: you wanted him to admit that it's ok after SOME time therefore it's ok after THIS time. You put the burden of proof for defending THIS time (i.e. 34 years) as acceptable on him. Which is hard.
Sneaky but only if don't get exposed.
Because equally correct framing is: if you accept that it's NOT ok after SOME time (1 year) then the burden of proof for defending it's ok THIS time (i.e. 34 years) is on you.
So go ahead, tell us what is the exact number of years that makes it ok. Defend YOUR number the way you wanted him to defend his.
- johnfn 7mo agoAre you upset about Calvin and Hobbes being a reference to John Calvin and Thomas Hobbes? Probably not? I think OP is asking an interesting question and you are being unnecessarily combative.
- rob74 7mo agoIMHO naming characters after famous people is more likely to be considered an "honest" homage than naming a company after them...
- johnfn 7mo agoAre you upset that Tesla is named Tesla? Probably not? A lot of people are angry about Tesla and I think even then I haven't ever heard of that particular complaint.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- angiolillo 7mo agoDoes your forever limit apply to names besides "Asimov"? There are a lot of companies and projects that have used the names of real people without that person's involvement or approval: Einstein, Tesla, Edison (besides the ones related to his company), Darwin, Beethoven, Mozart, Newton, Kepler, Galileo, Copernicus, Archimedes, Socrates...