One of the most delusional tweets I've ever seen
(nitter.net)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (37)
sorted by:
I mean, people came up with the term 'wordcel' for a reason.
Once you start paying attention, it kind of catches the eye.
It’s just a logical extension of “words as magic spells”. We’ve all come to realize that certain demographics view language as purely transactional - words as nothing more than a series of passwords that generate desirable outcomes for the speaker (as opposed to a cooperative exercise in mutual pursuit of an objective truth).
This dynamic gives rise to cargo cult behaviors among low IQ demos; black “intellectuals” in particular are very likely to espouse argumentative structures which they do not even remotely understand. These idiots heard someone else say “whataboutism”, so they filed that word under “winning arguments” and proceeded to deploy it with great confidence in totally incorrect contexts.
The other side of that demonic bell curve are the high IQ people who are legitimately good at lying, pilpul, and every other form of verbal manipulation. This is what we are actually talking about when we say “verbal IQ”. It’s not the ability to communicate clearly or succinctly. It’s about spinning twenty dollar words - many of them manufactured without majority consensus - in order to define reality in blatantly self-interested terms. That is what they are so skilled at doing.
What is the point of speaking if not to effect a change on something? Is it just to hear the sound of your own voice?
I guess for a lot of people it is.
You can effect change morally and honestly, with an eye towards fostering positive development for both yourself and society. Cooperation, collaboration, mutual pursuit of a sustainable understanding that reliably maps onto our shared Darwinian reality. That’s frequently how language is used in homogenous high trust societies.
The purpose of speaking is to impart information. Your purpose in imparting that information, and even it's accuracy is case by case.