Jump to content

You just don't get it


Is 'you just don't get it' (or any derivative of it) ever a valid argument against negative criticism?  

28 members have voted

  1. 1. -

    • Yes
      13
    • No
      15

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

Oh, and about personal attacks. There is something called the "ad hominem fallacy". That's when you attack the person instead of their views. "You're fat and disgusting, therefore your argument is wrong". Stupid, isn't it? It is.

Also it can be seen in humour and jokes within a certain group of people. I used to hang out with people that would often cross the line, such as "man, you're hopeless with women" (recurring argument though it's only partially true) and the like. Those are bordering on personal attacks. That kind of people ask of you that you aren't triggered by their panning and name-calling. Otherwise it's just a real, real chore.

Non-personal jokes are more difficult to create and include laughing about the current situation (the situation isn't a person and can't take offense), creative word plays, bright well-mannered humour (a la Pinkie Pie), and every brand of humour that doesn't involve a person's qualities and attributes (usually panned in a negative light, moreover).

It's also possible to be insulting towards a person without actually using insults. The overall tone and choice of words speak as well as any direct epithet.

Also there's a TV Tropes-homologated trope called "base breaker". That means a work of fiction that divides the audience between those who love it and those who despise it. Such as the SAO example provided above -there's little middle ground. I think it could mean the work is somewhat extreme (at least in its reception) and therefore it raises strong like and dislike. But, as far as I'm concerned with SAO, I think there are a lot of people that love it for its popularity, and hate it because of that, too. Also the characters don't exactly help, they're hit or miss, this is what I'm talking about with "extreme work".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Okarin said:

Oh, and about personal attacks. There is something called the "ad hominem fallacy". That's when you attack the person instead of their views. "You're fat and disgusting, therefore your argument is wrong". Stupid, isn't it? It is.

Also it can be seen in humour and jokes within a certain group of people. I used to hang out with people that would often cross the line, such as "man, you're hopeless with women" (recurring argument though it's only partially true) and the like. Those are bordering on personal attacks. That kind of people ask of you that you aren't triggered by their panning and name-calling. Otherwise it's just a real, real chore.

Non-personal jokes are more difficult to create and include laughing about the current situation (the situation isn't a person and can't take offense), creative word plays, bright well-mannered humour (a la Pinkie Pie), and every brand of humour that doesn't involve a person's qualities and attributes (usually panned in a negative light, moreover).

It's also possible to be insulting towards a person without actually using insults. The overall tone and choice of words speak as well as any direct epithet.

Also there's a TV Tropes-homologated trope called "base breaker". That means a work of fiction that divides the audience between those who love it and those who despise it. Such as the SAO example provided above -there's little middle ground. I think it could mean the work is somewhat extreme (at least in its reception) and therefore it raises strong like and dislike. But, as far as I'm concerned with SAO, I think there are a lot of people that love it for its popularity, and hate it because of that, too. Also the characters don't exactly help, they're hit or miss, this is what I'm talking about with "extreme work".

'you just don't get it' isn't necessarily an ad hominem though, it could just be used to point out a difference in taste

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/10/2016 at 6:02 PM, john 'mr. customer' smith said:

...it could just be used to point out a difference in taste

I'd say it can only be used to point out a difference in taste.

Not being able to 'get' something, in my opinion, is only worthwhile when there's something to 'get' in the first place. If something is awfully written, or drawn in such a way that if a child brought it home their mother would burn it, then there's really nothing to 'get'. However, if the writing is good, or at least satisfactory, or the art obviously has some skill in it (whether or not it's an art style you particularly like), then more of it is going to be on the reader clicking with it, or 'getting' it, as 't'were.

Therefore, I'd say that while 'you don't get it' is kind of valid, it's only valid in being a descriptive statement. As a response to criticism, constructive or otherwise, it's kinda daft.

Spoiler

By the way, I changed my mind after voting while writing down. Put me down for a no :sachi:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 11/3/2016 at 0:15 PM, AaronIsCrunchy said:

I'd say it can only be used to point out a difference in taste.

Not being able to 'get' something, in my opinion, is only worthwhile when there's something to 'get' in the first place. If something is awfully written, or drawn in such a way that if a child brought it home their mother would burn it, then there's really nothing to 'get'. However, if the writing is good, or at least satisfactory, or the art obviously has some skill in it (whether or not it's an art style you particularly like), then more of it is going to be on the reader clicking with it, or 'getting' it, as 't'were.

Therefore, I'd say that while 'you don't get it' is kind of valid, it's only valid in being a descriptive statement. As a response to criticism, constructive or otherwise, it's kinda daft.

  Reveal hidden contents

By the way, I changed my mind after voting while writing down. Put me down for a no :sachi:

 

One of my professors used the term 'he just doesn't get it' in reference to some cybernetics based research he was doing. It wasn't just a difference in taste it was also a difference in understanding that was being pointed out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...