yes it did

by tautology

your gf is a slut

by tautology

that would work if the word 'gf' meant 'slut'

see we're learning here

dude mitch link me that thread bro

fingers gf has bad teeth

by tautology

again that would work if the word 'gf' meant 'person with bad teeth'

i'm glad you're co-operating by giving me examples

dude why do you even invest in talking to adb

are you that bored

sometimes i try a different approach because i wonder what gets through to a man like this

things get through to him but once he takes a stance theyres no getting him off of it

he wont ever admit to that

fingers, bro

all you have to do is give me your definition of subjective

until then you're gay

by tautology

the definition of subjective is not my own

but that request alone tells me a lot about why you are the way you are

definitions are not absolute fingers, maybe if you werent a jackass you'd understand.

all I'd want is your personal definition, w/o looking at any dictionary

definitions are not absolute but they are objective

my personal definition of subjectivity is the perceived nature of an object i guess

it is hard to give you an explicit one that isn't gonna be in a dictionary

I did - its easy - just dont look in a dictionary

yes but yours is incorrect, because you didn't look in a dictionary

mine is correct, despite the fact that i didn't

so what youre trying to tell me is

is that text is objective

yes

im sorry fingers, but you are quite incorrect when you factor in the mechanism of sarcasm.

nope nothing in the content of the text can change the fact that the text is an object

its an object to deceive or be trusting, and that is subjective in the mind of the one who is in position to form an overall viewpoint

wow that reminds me of that beauty competition video where she talks about iraq

cool bro.

basically text is objective from the person who is creating a message

but subjective to the viewer

stfu.

no the text is objective and whatever bullshit you say about it doesn't change that

i know you mean that someone can write text in a way that subverts its literal meaning but that's different to the subject-object thing

how

because if someone thinks you aren't being sarcastic and you are, they are wrong

and being wrong isn't subjective because you cannot know whether someone is being literal or joking?

I'd love to see fingers have this argument with any freshman college english professor.

[QUOTE=adbforever;18928140]and being wrong isn't subjective because you cannot know whether someone is being literal or joking?[/QUOTE]

being wrong is objective because they either are or aren't joking

and you cannot know since text is static and people have dynamic forms of expressing themselves, therefore it is subjective