608
manbearpig (quokk.au)
submitted 7 months ago by [M] to c/peoplemastodon@quokk.au
360 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

Honestly confused, do you mean in your initial comment you were asserting that the choices were either "interact with man" or "interact with bear"? Because if so that was never the premise of the initial question, and nobody else here appears to be discussing it like it was.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    The bear and man options are presented as equivalent, so you're either interacting with either or simply on the same mountain as either, you can't just pick and choose for each instance or the question needs to be reformatted.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    ... The initial question doesn't frame it like that, yes; however I don't see anyone here implying it does, so I'm unclear on how it's at all relevant. The initial question is "would you rather be in the woods alone with a bear or with a man you didn't know" - being alone in the woods with a bear is an extremely common thing (I was alone in the woods with countless bears not moments ago when I stepped outside), and the risks carried by either option are the entire point of the question.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    "the initial question doesn't frame it like that"

    *proceeds to frame it as equivalent and still defend the bear option

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    What the... No, your objection was "picking and choos[ing]" (ex:) if you were just in the woods with a bear vs. had to interact with a man

    I said yes, that's not the initial question, and presented that simply being alone in the woods with a bear is an extremely common occurence, a reference to the "170 million black bears of prigozhin" comment from earlier.

    Now you're mad I'm presenting those two options as always having been treated as their equivalent forms, and yet still maintaining my earlier position after explaining the details of the question. But... why would my answer have changed? My position or the premise it was based on never changed. I never misunderstood anything about the question. You were the one that interpreted the discussion incorrectly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent