If sarcasm is not sarcasm

Forums: Sarcasm, World Level Ethics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

If sarcasm is not sarcasm and in fact is some other form of conclusion from environmental parameters forced by logic to exist, given it is the individuals right to reveal personal details or not...

Is it lying, to not decimate the target which creates it?

Factors to consider:
Human flaw of mistake in moments.
Human flaw of mistake left as mistake.
World flaw of preference to emotional contentment rather than safety and security.
Network subsystem fallibility.
Intelligence agencies permission and or lack of observation.
Intelligence agencies ethical codes of conduct relative to hardware VS biological software manipulation containment protocols.

Further factors at base of assumed direction can be presented.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 1,352 • Replies: 5

No top replies

@nothingtodo,

No. How often do people say something really stupid, only to realize at a later time they were being sarcastic.?

1 Reply

@roger,

Nominally there is objective at level X.
Above, denoted by stoicism and containment procedures provided by wiser forum members.

So it is a secondary consideration of emotional concern pertaining to truth?

To answer your question, the term 'stupid' appears variable the notion across a graph, relative to assorted vectoring factors. External and internal, societal and singular. So it follows clearly to yourself, and myself, that it is incalculable when some post lies on purpose.

It would also remain incalculable due to emotional range of the questioned and the variances therein.

0 Replies

@nothingtodo,

Answer in light of failure to respond directly to the question beyond complacency, of general belief.

When such is clear, if at all, people feel they are attacked by a force larger than themselves, yet it is they who attack themselves or they have not clicked 'ignore' when they should have.

It could be them who wish the world so veiled and the remainder who would alter this possibility. However flaws exist in that assumption per percentage section.

Awaiting clarity.

1 Reply

@nothingtodo,

Answer part 2.
That people already lie on both poles, means they cannot deduce the correct answer, so act in incorrect reactionary ways, sometimes.

Emotion is by its very nature a lie told to oneself without ones own knowledge, abuse is the knowing it.

Awaiting clarity.

0 Replies

@nothingtodo,

Quote:

World flaw of preference to emotional contentment rather than safety and security.

In my assessment I can find little flaw in the preference usually granted to emotional contentment rather than safety and security.
Emotional contentment is the method of exchange of information between subsystems, thus I also find no:

Quote:

Network subsystem fallibility.

I believe that as of this point in my reasoning, it will remain internally consistent, to not decimate the creator of sarcasms.

0 Replies

If sarcasm is not sarcasm

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know