J.K Rowling delivers scathing put down of Emma Watson on X

Hudo said:
Both Emma and Rowling can go fuck themselves. Hermione ending up with Ron is the most retarded shit I have ever witnessed. Ruined the whole franchise for me.
Click to expand...
It only really works if you figure Herminone as a MASSIVE control freak with some SIGNIFICANT trauma that drove her into the safest possible relationship.

Or she and Ron were apart during her college-age (is there a Wizardly college?) years where she was RAN THROUGH so now she's ready to settle after a year of polyjuice potion therapy putting her back together :P
 
poodaddy said:
Sure, but you also tacked a little bit of rudeness on there for no reason whatsoever. Just didn't see the point of the behavior is all, especially for a first post, not the kind of behavior that endears you to a community necessarily.
Click to expand...
tell me poodaddy; what would endear me
 
bitbydeath said:
*Unless you're a woman.
Click to expand...
Yes, presumably referring to women's sports--problematic for liberals because it starts to infringe on others rights. But yes, I agree that most liberals leaned more on the equal access of opportunity side of this issue and it cost them in the end, very badly.
 
Hudo said:
Both Emma and Rowling can go fuck themselves. Hermione ending up with Ron is the most retarded shit I have ever witnessed. Ruined the whole franchise for me.
Click to expand...
He was the ying to her yang or some shit.

Realistically, he probably watch her fucking other wizards in their bed and help them with the occasional leviosa when the erection is not up to par...
 
Last edited:
BlackTron said:
Just wondering, through which context did we decide Sydney Sweeney is a man?

If a dog behaves like a cat, it's still a dog. We don't start calling it a cat socially but a dog at the vet. It's just a dog acting like a cat. You see where this is going. That's a man, acting womanly. He doesn't just become a woman during a bout of catty behavior (see what I did there?)
Click to expand...
"A dog acting like a cat is still a dog" is just pointing out how we use the word dog. It says nothing about laws of nature or metaphysical truth of animals. In the ordinary "language-game" we are using right now, we don't classify animals by their behavior alone but by lineage, biology, appearance, etc
BlackTron said:
I can draw a picture of the earth as a flat planet. Now the Earth is flat in fantasy. It's still round though, despite the vast possibilities of language.

Biology/medicine/psychology are all linked together and cannot be separated without ignoring the very same idea of empirical science that enables us to assert the earth is round. For a forum-appropriate analogy, it's like claiming all of the separate moving parts in a video game exist in a vacuum and don't affect each other; yet by observing one thing, you can make an empirically-tested prediction about how it will affect another thing. Someone in the field of psychology might prescribe a medicine and dose choice judged by biology, because they know different neurotransmitter issues present themselves.

It's not an extreme take; it's an observation, like the sun rises, water is wet, just upgraded to causal relationships, like; water evaporates, and makes rain. But there is a hard limit on how complex science can get before people come out to deny it on their magic cell phones.
Click to expand...
Our concepts of 'man' and 'woman' are not like the concepts of 'round' and 'flat' because those are used in a completely different scientific "language-game", settled by measurement, while man and woman function more like family resemblance terms that can shift based on context, ie biology, social roles, identity etc. The meaning of 'man' or 'woman' is not fixed by chromosomes like the shape of the earth is fixed by physics; it is fixed by the language-games we play, and those games can change.


The temptation to link biology, medicine, psychology, etc together to find some single, hidden essence that ties them all together is mistaking how language works. if you look at how words are used in these practices you will find overlapping but non identical criteria, not one essence.

source: wittgenstein
 
12Goblins said:
"A dog acting like a cat is still a dog" is just pointing out how we use the word dog. It says nothing about laws of nature or metaphysical truth of animals. In the ordinary "language-game" we are using right now, we don't classify animals by their behavior alone but by lineage, biology, appearance, etc

Our concepts of 'man' and 'woman' are not like the concepts of 'round' and 'flat' because those are used in a completely different scientific "language-game", settled by measurement, while man and woman function more like family resemblance terms that can shift based on context, ie biology, social roles, identity etc. The meaning of 'man' or 'woman' is not fixed by chromosomes like the shape of the earth is fixed by physics; it is fixed by the language-games we play, and those games can change.


The temptation to link biology, medicine, psychology, etc together to find some single, hidden essence that ties them all together is mistaking how language works. if you look at how words are used in these practices you will find overlapping but non identical criteria, not one essence.

source: wittgenstein
Click to expand...
Why is it wrong to understand a transsexual person through a biological language?
 
bobbobuk said:
tell me poodaddy; what would endear me
Click to expand...
Kindness, good humor, relatability, just general community friendly behavior, stuff like that. Not sure why you decided to come in hot and hostile, but I promise you this community is outstanding and loving if you show your best self here, best games forum by far, and honestly just one of the best forums in general if not the best, but people here respond well to positivity. You definitely get your negative pricks who go hostile for no reason, keyboard warriors and internet autists, you know the type, but I think this community's positives outweigh the negatives by quite a lot.
 
12Goblins said:
"A dog acting like a cat is still a dog" is just pointing out how we use the word dog. It says nothing about laws of nature or metaphysical truth of animals. In the ordinary "language-game" we are using right now, we don't classify animals by their behavior alone but by lineage, biology, appearance, etc

Our concepts of 'man' and 'woman' are not like the concepts of 'round' and 'flat' because those are used in a completely different scientific "language-game", settled by measurement, while man and woman function more like family resemblance terms that can shift based on context, ie biology, social roles, identity etc. The meaning of 'man' or 'woman' is not fixed by chromosomes like the shape of the earth is fixed by physics; it is fixed by the language-games we play, and those games can change.


The temptation to link biology, medicine, psychology, etc together to find some single, hidden essence that ties them all together is mistaking how language works. if you look at how words are used in these practices you will find overlapping but non identical criteria, not one essence.

source: wittgenstein
Click to expand...
 
P:axMagellanic said:
In ancient Rome actors were barely above the level of prosititutes and slaves in society.
Click to expand...
WzYNqTe.png
 
diffusionx said:
I think she deserves some grace.
Click to expand...
Why? If she is not qualified to talk on things she knows nothing about, then just shut the fuck up! This is the problem with these actors/actresses- they feel the need to speak on things that have zero impact on their lives or they have no knowledge of yet in trying to sound virtuous they feel the need to speak up to maybe gain some points with someone within their Hollywood movie space bubble... I don't get it. And all of it comes across as so disingenuous. Plain and simple- just shut the fuck up if you have no idea what you're on about. So no, no grace for her or any fucking person talking about stuff they know nothing about.

And JK deserved this moment to speak some much needed truth about these idiots.
 
12Goblins said:
"A dog acting like a cat is still a dog" is just pointing out how we use the word dog.
Click to expand...

You mean, as an improper noun that refers to a domesticated canine animal, ie, a dog?

Like I said in my post, I'm not TRYING to connect biology, medicine and psychology, any more than I am TRYING to connect that water evaporating leads to rain; some people are simply more sensitive to observable cause and effect relationships than others I guess, though to take it a step further, you seem to be trying very hard to apply doublethink with this dog metaphysics stuff.
 
MHubert said:
So how do you apply the 'biology game'?
Click to expand...
Hm, are you asking in what situations are we allowed to use biology's rules?

You can apply the 'biology' game when the purpose is scientific or medical -- ie, when doctors are trying to understand the physical facts to find treatment, ie looking at chromosomes, hormones, organs, etc. When a doctor is concerned with "man or woman?", it's to guide diagnosis, risk assessment, treatment, and so forth, it says nothing about wether someone is treated as a man or woman in society. Trying to use these rules from one language game (biology) to define things in another language game (this case the "social language game") is misusing language and where confusion happens

In the "social language game" the meaning of things like identity (man, woman) or roles (friend, leader) are not fixed and measurable like they are in biology; they are "flexible" because their meaning comes from how we use those words, and because different communities, cultures, and individuals use those words differently, naturally we have disagreements
 
Last edited:
Your entire career was alavancated by JK Harry Potter movies. If it weren't for them, you would be a nobody. Thats incredibly ungrateful.
 
BlackTron said:
You mean, as an improper noun that refers to a domesticated canine animal, ie, a dog?

Like I said in my post, I'm not TRYING to connect biology, medicine and psychology, any more than I am TRYING to connect that water evaporating leads to rain; some people are simply more sensitive to observable cause and effect relationships than others I guess, though to take it a step further, you seem to be trying very hard to apply doublethink with this dog metaphysics stuff.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm just trying to say that in the social language game we don't re-categorize dogs as cats based on their behavior. For us, if a dog acts like a cat, it's still a dog because that's just how we use the word 'dog' - in some cultures, they do classify different species in the same category based on their behavior, like if they are nocturnal. So, it's possible for some cultures that the dog from your example would now be called a cat or whatever by them.
The point is that the meaning of words in the social language game comes from its use in social practice, and looking for some universal essence is a trap and conceptual dead end.

obviously i'm simplifying things, butchering others, but wittgenstein pretty much killed traditional philosophy w/ this concept
 
Last edited:
12Goblins said:
Yeah, I'm just trying to say that in the social language game we don't re-categorize dogs as cats based on their behavior. For us, if a dog acts like a cat, it's still a dog because that's just how we use the word 'dog' - in some cultures, they do classify different species in the same category based on their behavior, like if they are nocturnal. So, it's possible for some cultures that the dog from your example would now be called a cat or whatever by them.
The point is that the meaning of words in the social language game comes from its use in social practice, not some universal essence.
Click to expand...

Computers communicate and process in 1s and 0s; a simple system of either ON or OFF (binary). Despite that different cultures may have different interpretations when I say "one", or use a different system or language, the computer depends on being able to rely on dependable information within its own system, or it stops working.

The system we are using right now is English. When I call the vet and tell him my cat needs help, and he asks what color its eyes look, and I say "white", meanwhile I have a dog with red bloodshot eyes, no one gives a shit that white means red or cat means dog in the 1800s in Tunisia on a Sunday, the same way I took the first word of your post, "Yeah", at face value and didn't say "that means no in some cultures", because I don't want to waste anyones time with anything that disingenuous.

All you are saying is that words change in different languages. Real deep. They still define a specific thing that is not fluid. If you say "Yes", and it means "No" in another culture, all it means is that they misunderstood you. You don't suddenly really mean "no" because that's what "yes" means in that place. A man is not a woman just because the definitions of man and woman were flipped.

You can tell me that rain can be dry, if we only sometimes change the definition of rain, but why? This is doublethink 101. When I say rain, I'm using the English word that refers to water falling from the sky. If you change the language, I would need to use that languages' word. The legal documents that say "man" or 'woman" are all in English.
 
BlackTron said:
Computers communicate and process in 1s and 0s; a simple system of either ON or OFF (binary). Despite that different cultures may have different interpretations when I say "one", or use a different system or language, the computer depends on being able to rely on dependable information within its own system, or it stops working.

The system we are using right now is English. When I call the vet and tell him my cat needs help, and he asks what color its eyes look, and I say "white", meanwhile I have a dog with red bloodshot eyes, no one gives a shit that white means red or cat means dog in the 1800s in Tunisia on a Sunday, the same way I took the first word of your post, "Yeah", at face value and didn't say "that means no in some cultures", because I don't want to waste anyones time with anything that disingenuous.

All you are saying is that words change in different languages. Real deep. They still define a specific thing that is not fluid. If you say "Yes", and it means "No" in another culture, all it means is that they misunderstood you. You don't suddenly really mean "no" because that's what "yes" means in that place. A man is not a woman just because the definitions of man and woman were flipped.

You can tell me that rain can be dry, if we only sometimes change the definition of rain, but why? This is doublethink 101. When I say rain, I'm using the English word that refers to water falling from the sky. If you change the language, I would need to use that languages' word. The legal documents that say "man" or 'woman" are all in English.
Click to expand...

"All you are saying is that words change in different languages."

o _ O
 
Hudo said:
Both Emma and Rowling can go fuck themselves. Hermione ending up with Ron is the most retarded shit I have ever witnessed. Ruined the whole franchise for me.
Click to expand...
Don't worry. She'll probably be a strong independent gay twelve year old in the TV series.

She'll be slaaaaying!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Had to put down my dog today
33
597
Beretta replied
China is cracking down on AI generated content online
News 
9
276
ForAcademicPurposes replied
UFO? Lets shoot it down
10
240
IAmRei replied
  • Locked
ICE x Pokemon
24
221
I collect VHS tapes replied
Spotify founder Daniel Ek stepping down as CEO
4
19
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
Top Bottom