Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

wildadragon t1_j226o6f wrote

Only failure is you saying there are no ambidextrous people then flat out admitting you're ambidextrous. Can't be more wrong or hypocritical than that.

38

Ophiomancy_Xaxax OP t1_j2280dd wrote

Yeah, well, I didn't think I'd have to defend it in the completely literal sense, but I wasn't expecting to encounter the Lord of Ambidexterity here, either. It was nice meeting you, though.

(Also, it was you who said I probably wasn't ambidextrous so now who's the hypocrite?)

−5

wildadragon t1_j2287rq wrote

So you used specific words and didn't realize they had literal meanings?

>Yeah, well, I didn't think

You certainly didnt.

30

Ophiomancy_Xaxax OP t1_j2712e0 wrote

This comment is stupid. Words have meanings. Sentences also have interpretations, and this sentence in particular I explained to you was to be interpreted non-literally.
Look, are you actually suggesting that I am on the one hand saying ambidextrous people do not literally exist in this world while simultaneously calling myself ambidextrous? And that you have actually come in here and remedied the situation by pointing out my error? Is that what you think your role was here? Hey, thanks, man!

That you could have spent as much time as you have here without ever moving beyond this, even after I walked you through it, is really something. You didn't for a second consider the fact that I may have had some point I was making beyond the apparent contradiction that has occupied so much of your attention? Not possible?

0

wildadragon t1_j271l71 wrote

That's exactly what you wrote there is no "interpretation" if it was something vague maybe, but you made absolute statements.

>There are no ambidextrous people

>I am ambidextrous

Like what's there to interpret?

You're welcome, glad I could help you see the error of your ways. Learn from your mistakes.

1