petrol_sniff_king comments on "Why would I spend time bonding with my kid when I can just get an AI to do it for me?"

[–] petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 20 hours ago (3 children)

Re-reading the thread, I understand better what you were saying. This is different, though: the AI thing is kind of sudden, in a cultural sense, and it's harder to imagine someone having married a person already knowing they would be into this extremely anti-human parenting style beforehand.

Like, you're suggesting that a Republican guy probably has a Republican wife, and yeah that's true, but I don't think that it follows that an AI-absentee-father would probably be married to an AI-absentee-mother.

And that's broadly why people are blowing up at you. Rhetorically speaking, it sounds a bit like you're just being spiteful.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] warm@kbin.earth 1 point 12 hours ago (2 children)

I'm basically being told I cannot form an opinion based off an assumption while they are doing the exact same thing. It's hypocritical.

We were not discussing the percent chance of one situation over another, I am just being preached to that only one thing can be true. "I would leave him" isnt evidence that she would.

I think it makes perfect sense to predict she wouldnt leave him over this, just in the same way she would. We also dont know how long they have been together, or how old their child is. There's so much we dont know and that is all I pointed out. But apparently the echo chamber decided it was that the wife will leave, so any other input was going to be met in this way.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 4 hours ago (1 child)

Right, but there's something about this that you're not understanding. The people in this thread are not talking about a real woman, they're talking about a hypothetical woman. A "reasonable person" kind of woman.

Yes, we could talk about how it's technically possible that his wife is on disability and is circumstantially incapable of leaving him, therefore she wouldn't, QED—but it's just not that interesting.

People are saying "she would leave him," but what they actually mean is "she should leave him." You don't realize that you're arguing with this second sentence, that's why you're chafing against everyone here. There's subtext that you're missing.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] warm@kbin.earth 1 point 4 hours ago

!!! I am talking about a hypothetical woman too! It's literally no different! My hypothetical woman just doesn't align with the preference that the wife would leave him over this. That's it! I'm so confused on how something so simple has been so confusing for you all!

I am just being trolled at this point. I fell for it. I'm gonna leave this here, I don't know if its the effects of the echo chamber or a lack of reading comprehension and critical thinking, but it's just going to go around in circles, I can't explain it any further. Good luck out there.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent