I considered deleting the post, but this seems more cowardly than just admitting I was wrong. But TIL something!

  • criitz@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Heres my example

    • [wrong] police can get away with any crimes they want (child POV)
    • [average] police can’t break the law even though they are police (the way it ‘should be’)
    • [enlightened] police can get away with any crimes they want (reality)

    The middle person thinks they are smarter than the left person. But it turns out the left person was naive but correct, as shown by the right/enlightened person having the same conclusion. IMO anyway.

    EDIT: also, the point of the example you gave is that Frankenstein the Doctor IS the monster (metaphorically) because he created the actual monster - I think you have misinterpreted it.

    • Ook the Librarian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Dr. Frankenstein is not a monster for creating an actual monster. He is a monster for abandoning his creation and escaping the responsibility of care for his creation.

      I thought we were having a friendly chat, but you really insulted my intelligence there. Do you think I would have found that meme remotely interesting if I thought Frankenstein had terminals on his neck?

      • criitz@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Sorry, I didn’t mean to insult your intelligence in any way. Just trying to have a friendly chat also. Sometimes tone can come across wrong in text. My bad

    • Ook the Librarian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      If you take the average interpretation of “police can’t …” to mean “it’s illegal for the police to …”, then yes, the average guy is right in a boring (and tautological) way. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable way for the average person to interpret the [average] line. The meme hopes to get you thinking about the last line.

      Now this money example is particularly hard to argue since if you have the interpretation that the dollar will collapse, or if you think you have to store this money, then, all resolutions suck.

      If a genie were to say to me, “Anytime you need money, you can reach in your pocket and pull out a bill. Would you like it to always be $1 or always be $100?”, I think I would agree with the enlightened guy here, even though I know the boring answer is right.

      • criitz@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I think you can make an argument either way of whether it would be better to have $1 or $100 bills.

        I was more interested in debating the meme format XD

        • Ook the Librarian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I confused though. You seem to think I didn’t quite get the format, but I feel I’ve explained how I see it, and don’t see any contrast with the meme you posted. So far that’s three in the format as I understand it.

          So, if your answer to the genie question I asked a bit ago is “$100s please”, then the meme would speak to you. If you truly don’t care, the guy on right is wrong in your book. I’m in the “$100s please” camp.