• LOGIC💣@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      ·
      2 years ago

      I wouldn’t even try to defend OP, but I once heard someone say that if you have more than four apples, then it is also definitely true that you have four apples.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        2 years ago

        That’s true in a very literal sense, but there’s a whole branch of linguistics called pragmatics that’s concerned with things like why it’s usually safe to conclude that when someone says they have four apples, they mean that have only four apples. When there’s any ambiguity I talk like a mathematician and use phrases like “at least four apples” or “exactly four apples”.

          • Nelots@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            On the other hand, adding a single world like “only” in there suddenly makes it completely false. Language is fun.

      • humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        OP treating his statement as a correction requires that he’s not using this interpretation. If he were to use this defense, so could the teacher, so he’d just be changing how he’s wrong, not that he is.

      • gandalf_der_12te@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        What if there’s a worm in one of them?

        Like, you think you habe more than four apples.

        Then you find out that most of them have worms.

        In the end, you are left with two apples.

        So now, it is not true that you have four apples.

      • Rodeo@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        If you can actually have a reasoned discussion about it, instead of simply getting angry at being questioned, then you are better than 90% of teachers.

        In my experience most teachers don’t like being questioned, which of course is directly antithetical to their supposed vocation.

          • Rodeo@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Sounds like you just don’t want your authority to be challenged.

            If you’re wrong and a student points that out, own it. Instead you expect them to question their own knowledge while submitting to your authority for confirmation or denial. But if the student already knows, they don’t need your confirmation. They need you to admit that you were incorrect, and move forward with the correct information. Otherwise you’re just demonstrating that you’re an authority that cannot be trusted to be fair.

            Authority that cannot be challenged is authority that cannot be respected. Authority must continually earn the respect of its constituents, or it will lose its power over them.

              • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                If they “know” something because they read about it elsewhere, I should be treated as a equally valid source of information because I am.

                But you’ve just proven yourself to not be an equally valid source of information because you spread misinformation.

    • dingus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I identify as degenerate matter

      Edit: Whoops, someone already commented that elsewhere in the thread. Oh well.

      • Danksy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Because if we weren’t then no class would ever learn anything, as the teaching would move at a glacial pace and cover material that isn’t relevant until you start on your PhD.