Bonus points if it’s usually misused/misunderstood by the people who say it
“Agree to disagree.” No, dipshit, you’re just wrong.
I do not agree to disagree, because we’re not arguing about opinions. Your belief is simply, objectively incorrect. Or mine is, which is something that I would be willing to accept. If I were wrong, you’d be able to convince me that I’m wrong. We can keep going until one of us accepts that we didn’t have an accurate understanding of reality.
It’s always the dipshits that fall back on “Well, we will have to agree to disagree,” usually right after they’ve been presented with enough evidence to change the mind of a rational person. Fuck that, I do not agree to disagree.
You don’t get tired of arguments? I see it as a ‘fine, be stupid if you want’ because I’m not spending more time on the point.
Agreeing to disagree is just more polite and often nicer for both, if such agreement is reached. You’re basically saying that we can’t really convince each other of our position so let’s just leave it at that instead of trying endlessly.
If I were wrong, you’d be able to convince me that I’m wrong. We can keep going until one of us accepts that we didn’t have an accurate understanding of reality.
I had an ex like you.
Agree to disagree is for things like “what ice cream flavor is best”, not for things like “2+2=4”.
I have found that the issue is often that people tend to not realize they’re arguing that 2+2=6, they think they’re arguing what ice cream flavor is the best
This is exactly the sort of argument that I was thinking of when I wrote the comment. We can agree to disagree on the best ice cream flavor, because everyone has different tastes. We cannot agree to disagree on whether the earth is flat, because it’s not and we have overwhelming proof that it isn’t.
No, dipshit, you’re just wrong.
Your belief is simply, objectively incorrect.
If I were wrong, you’d be able to convince me that I’m wrong. We can keep going until one of us accepts that we didn’t have an accurate understanding of reality.
Boy if this doesn’t describe most people arguing online lol.
which is something that I would be willing to accept.
I’ve found this is much harder than it seems. People either don’t understand they’re wrong (which might be the reason they’re wrong to begin with) or unwilling to admit to being wrong even to themselves. So you’ll have the first part of my quote lol
“An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind”.
No it doesn’t. At most the world no longer has depth perception.
“The cloud is just someone else’s computers.”
If that’s what you really think the cloud is, still, then you are a dinosaur who is not evolving with the times.
I usually think of it this way, though I use the term server and acknowledge there are often many servers involved. Is this incorrect, or is there a better way to think about it?
“Blood is thicker than water” a misquote of “The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb” which has the exact opposite meaning.
That’s not actually true (according to Wikipedia and a few other sources, at least). The ‘blood is thicker than water’ saying has been around for centuries in various forms with the current meaning, and the covenant/womb variation is relatively recent, and mostly stems from a few books that claim that it’s the ‘real meaning’ without sources or proof.
Thank you so much for saying this! One time there was a Twitter thread that started with someone asking, “What are some things that people believe/accept without having liked into it further.” Someone responded with this “the original phrase is… covenant…womb” and the OP replied with someone like, “yeah people are such sheep”. I wanted to explode.
But to back your point, you can go and read for yourself the very first instance of this phrase in context as the very old book it comes from has been digitally scanned. It’s old enough to be in middle English, but I still thought it was fairly easy to make out the original phrase as we know it today.
“ One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.”
