You can't even define "Personality"

[Luffymaxxing]

That's why it's cope

 

[thecel]

Can’t define “chair” either. Chairs are cope.

 

[Deleted member 6583]

Can’t define “chair” either. Chairs are cope.

View attachment 2670013

A woman is someone who identifies as a woman.

Wait, that's a circular definition, you dumb fuck.

Ugh

 

[thecel]

A woman is someone who identifies as a woman.

Wait, that's a circular definition, you dumb fuck.

Ugh

not if the 2 usages of the word woman in the sentence point to different definitions

 

[thecel]

A woman is someone who identifies as a woman.

Wait, that's a circular definition, you dumb fuck.

Ugh

woman1: someone who identifies as a woman2

woman2: an adult human female

 

[Deleted member 6583]

woman1: someone who identifies as a woman2

woman2: an adult human female

If a dog identifies as a cat, does the dog now fit the definition of 'cat'?

 

[thecel]

If a dog identifies as a cat, does the dog now fit the definition of 'cat'?

If the people who speak the language decide to add an “alternative definition” of cat, then yes.

^ that’s exactly what liberals propose when it comes to gender

 

[Orc]

most people more or less carry the same personality traits the only difference between individuals is the strength of the components but how that's perceived isn't actually determined by your actions but largely your appearance.

 

[Deleted member 6583]

If the people who speak the language decide to add an “alternative definition” of cat, then yes.

^ that’s exactly what liberals propose when it comes to gender

How about you call the dog who identifies as a cat a 'trans cat'?

Because calling a dog a cat doesn't make sense since the definition of 'cat' is a specific biological species (Felis catus).

I think it would be confusing if I had to start calling dogs that identify as 'cats', cats, and I think it would undermine the definition of 'cat'.

It would be easy to recognize some of these dogs that identify as cats, and I'd call them cats to avoid upsetting them, but others might look like normal dogs. In those cases, I'd just assume they're normal dogs and call them dogs, and then they might get mad at me, like, 'Did you just call me a dog? I'm a cat!'

Then, there would also be the ones that look virtually indistinguishable from real cats. I might have to start asking cats if they're Felis catus or Canis lupus familiaris, because I'm not into dogs that identify as cats. And if we start calling real cats 'Felis catus' instead of 'cat', the dogs that identify as cats would be upset and start demanding that they're also Felis catus.

 

[Tabula Rasa]

thread derailed hard it was an interesting starter : p

 

[Deleted member 57464]

looks theory is so water i dont get why people will go out of their way to cherrypick exceptions just to prove it wrong

 

[Deleted member 43822]

Personality is: