05-22-2016, 07:27 AM
You claim my rhetoric is "reckless". You have given no explanation of how my simple statement of observation is so. Now you claim it invites "dangerous company" - I have no idea what you mean as it could be any of quite a list of possibilities or some combination thereof.
Depends on your use of "our" here. Your semantics are not quite sufficiently precise. That aside, I take consistently diligent steps to ensure my words are carefully chosen. I fail at this on occasion and when it is pointed out to me, I own it, acknowledge it, and do what I can to clarify my meanings and better ensure I don't make the same mistake again. I even fail at that at times. But on the whole, I am pretty careful about how I structure my sentences precisely because I hold some understanding of the nature and valence of language.
The other side of the communications coin is to ensure that you (third person you, not YOU perforce... devilish language, English) take the proper steps to make sure you have received the message that has been sent. I do my level best to do this as a matter of habit. Once again, I fail at it often enough to make it worthy of mention, but I can also again say that on the whole I do pretty well at not going off prematurely when I think someone has erred. If you notice, in such cases I most often ask for someone's clarification on this point or that. There are times when meaning seems clear enough and I will respond under that assumption, and I am STILL wrong. That's the nature of human communications, especially in this text-oriented medium, and doubly so where topics tend to be contentious by their nature.