☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ to [email protected]English • 2 months agoFree Thinkerlemmy.mlimagemessage-square84fedilinkarrow-up1208arrow-down131
arrow-up1177arrow-down1imageFree Thinkerlemmy.ml☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ to [email protected]English • 2 months agomessage-square84fedilink
minus-squaredavel [he/him]linkfedilinkEnglish16•2 months agoName dropping a game theory hypothetical is not an argument.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink-15•2 months agoYou’re right, it’s not an argument. But it’s a perfectly sufficient reply to a one-word question that doesn’t properly provide an argument of its own.
minus-squareCowbee [he/they]linkfedilink4•2 months agoYour original comment only garnered a one word question because you were too vague.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink-1•2 months agoThe original comment that garnered a one word response wasn’t mine. Thanks though.
minus-squareCowbee [he/they]linkfedilink4•2 months agoThere was a vague “argument,” followed by a request for elaboration, followed by another somehow more vague “argument” from yourself.
minus-squareDessalineslinkfedilink16•2 months ago“Hey friend, can you share some of your potato chips?” “Sorry, prisoners dilemma, can’t.”
Ever hear of the prisoner’s dilemma?
Name dropping a game theory hypothetical is not an argument.
You’re right, it’s not an argument. But it’s a perfectly sufficient reply to a one-word question that doesn’t properly provide an argument of its own.
Your original comment only garnered a one word question because you were too vague.
The original comment that garnered a one word response wasn’t mine. Thanks though.
There was a vague “argument,” followed by a request for elaboration, followed by another somehow more vague “argument” from yourself.
“Hey friend, can you share some of your potato chips?”
“Sorry, prisoners dilemma, can’t.”
Yep, you got it!