|
Post by quinn on Jun 27, 2013 16:25:19 GMT -5
I think I might get what B is saying. It's kind of a hyper version of literalism. If I conceive a question, and it is stated in a grammatically correct way and not like jibberish, then I have conceived it correctly. I cannot misconceive my own questions. I can base the question on a misconception, but the question itself is just conceived.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 16:26:43 GMT -5
Not unfair, errant. And yes, because as long as the question makes sense (i.e., 'what is that?') it cannot, of itself, be misconceived. And what if the question doesn't make sense? Can it be called misconceived then? And how do you define whether a question makes sense or not? Why do apples taste like oranges? Apples taste like oranges? I suppose they could, but the question still isn't misconceived. What might be misconceived is that apples taste like oranges, but if they taste like oranges to you, then the question isn't misconceived at all (but perhaps your taste buds are). I'll concede that perhaps a completely nonsensical question can be 'misconceived'--something like, "is the plethora gefilte fish complained by mom?" might work as misconceived. But, really, when's the last time anyone asked you that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 16:27:12 GMT -5
Why do apples taste like oranges?
That question is at cross purposes, is bewildered, confused, perplexed, confounded, confused, fails, gets its signals crossed, get signals mixed, gets it wrong, gets the wrong impression, misapplies, misapprehends, miscalculates, miscomprehends, misconstrues, misinterprets, misjudges, misknows, misreads, misreckons, misses the point, misses, mistakes, does not register, takes amiss, takes wrongly, and <drumbroll> is misconceived.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 16:27:23 GMT -5
I think I might get what B is saying. It's kind of a hyper version of literalism. If I conceive a question, and it is stated in a grammatically correct way and not like jibberish, then I have conceived it correctly. I cannot misconceive my own questions. I can base the question on a misconception, but the question itself is just conceived. Someone else gets it. YAY!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 16:29:19 GMT -5
I think I might get what B is saying. It's kind of a hyper version of literalism. If I conceive a question, and it is stated in a grammatically correct way and not like jibberish, then I have conceived it correctly. I cannot misconceive my own questions. I can base the question on a misconception, but the question itself is just conceived. Yes I think that's it too. Me, I don't have the same prob with the word.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jun 27, 2013 16:36:30 GMT -5
And what if the question doesn't make sense? Can it be called misconceived then? And how do you define whether a question makes sense or not? Why do apples taste like oranges? Apples taste like oranges? I suppose they could, but the question still isn't misconceived. What might be misconceived is that apples taste like oranges, but if they taste like oranges to you, then the question isn't misconceived at all (but perhaps your taste buds are). I'll concede that perhaps a completely nonsensical question can be 'misconceived'--something like, "is the plethora gefilte fish complained by mom?" might work as misconceived. But, really, when's the last time anyone asked you that? Once, as a young child, I observed a group of adult relatives sitting around a kitchen table playing cards. Suddenly one Aunt cried out in pain as she reached down to grab her leg. She cried out "Oh God, I've got a cramp". Now, being young, having never heard the word cramp before and not knowing what it meant, my mind suggested to me that she was somehow being bitten painfully by a crab. Puzzled, I asked my mother, "How did a crab get in the house?". She laughed at my misconceived question before explaining as best she could what a cramp really was.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 16:39:55 GMT -5
Apples taste like oranges? I suppose they could, but the question still isn't misconceived. What might be misconceived is that apples taste like oranges, but if they taste like oranges to you, then the question isn't misconceived at all (but perhaps your taste buds are). I'll concede that perhaps a completely nonsensical question can be 'misconceived'--something like, "is the plethora gefilte fish complained by mom?" might work as misconceived. But, really, when's the last time anyone asked you that? Once, as a young child, I observed a group of adult relatives sitting around a kitchen table playing cards. Suddenly one Aunt cried out in pain as she reached down to grab her leg. She cried out "Oh God, I've got a cramp". Now, being young, having never heard the word cramp before and not knowing what it meant, my mind suggested to me that she was somehow being bitten painfully by a crab. Puzzled, I asked my mother, "How did a crab get in the house?". She laughed at my misconceived question before explaining as best she could what a cramp really was. Whoever wrote that needs to get in on this discussion, then.
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jun 27, 2013 16:54:18 GMT -5
I think I might get what B is saying. It's kind of a hyper version of literalism. If I conceive a question, and it is stated in a grammatically correct way and not like jibberish, then I have conceived it correctly. I cannot misconceive my own questions. I can base the question on a misconception, but the question itself is just conceived. Someone else gets it. YAY! B - you need a mental massage to loosen up your hold on literalism.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 16:59:15 GMT -5
Someone else gets it. YAY! B - you need a mental massage to loosen up your hold on literalism. Yeah. But, hey, at least the term doesn't make me go ballistic, anymore
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 28, 2013 0:02:59 GMT -5
How about this... 1) person A has an idea 2) person A asks person B a question about that idea 3) person B then tells person A that the question is misconceived Where's the misconception? My take is that when the questioner is being told that their question is misconceived, it is at (1), having the idea in the first place. Person B doesn't want to wipe A's butt and explain the misconception to them so they are left to wiping their own butt in figuring out where the misconception is, or even if there is a misconception. I think what you're wanting, Beingist, is to have someone explain and spell out the misconceptions instead of having someone just tell you "The question is misconceived". If that's what he wanted, ho would have asked like any normal human being, but if I recall there was no such discussion of the matter. Instead he rejected the notion without explanation, became offended, and moved straight to mocking. So no, I don't think there was anything being wanted by person A and denied by butt wiper B. Another curiosity is why a perceived languaging violation was taken as a personal offense.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 28, 2013 0:18:14 GMT -5
Someone else gets it. YAY! B - you need a mental massage to loosen up your hold on literalism. Indeed. Funny thang, when I thought B was just concerned about losing a question he saw as important, I felt much more tolerance for the nonsense than I do now that i know it's an exercise in word lawyering.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 28, 2013 0:26:54 GMT -5
B - you need a mental massage to loosen up your hold on literalism. Yeah. But, hey, at least the term doesn't make me go ballistic, anymore Your verbal structure sensibilities were offended?......And this led to a 3 day tirade and blocking maneuvers and mocking?....You can't be serious??
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 28, 2013 2:17:04 GMT -5
Yeah. But, hey, at least the term doesn't make me go ballistic, anymore Your verbal structure sensibilities were offended?......And this led to a 3 day tirade and blocking maneuvers and mocking?....You can't be serious?? He's a man of the words by profession. Have a heart! You were messing with his holy cows.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 28, 2013 7:13:10 GMT -5
Yeah. But, hey, at least the term doesn't make me go ballistic, anymore Your verbal structure sensibilities were offended?......And this led to a 3 day tirade and blocking maneuvers and mocking?....You can't be serious?? Naw, it's more than that, but it's a long story, and not worth reliving.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 29, 2013 23:16:21 GMT -5
Greetings.. Your verbal structure sensibilities were offended?......And this led to a 3 day tirade and blocking maneuvers and mocking?....You can't be serious?? He's a man of the words by profession. Have a heart! You were messing with his holy cows. From my perspective, the issue fails as we watch people using words like weapons, but.. the weapons are poorly maintained, improperly used, and the target misidentified.. perhaps, pretense revealed by incompetence becomes its own target.. Be well..
|
|