this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2026
398 points (100.0% liked)
NPCs (NonPolitical Comics)
435 readers
1069 users here now
A community for comic lovers who just want to get away from politics and gloom and doom.
- Rule 1 - Be civil.
- Rule 2 - Don't be uncivil.
Posting guidelines:
- No political comics. This generally includes anything referencing whatever bullshit Trump is up to, but also includes the megacorps. Essentially if the comic is about how the world today sucks, it doesn't belong here.
- Where possible, start the title with [comic name]. This refers to the name of the artist or overall comic, not the title of the specific strip.
- Tag NSFW / NSFL / AI content accordingly.
founded 2 days ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The fact that you don't understand how badly you're misusing those terms instead of talking about prescriptivism and descriptivism is what shows how little you know.
It's not "empicisim" you dolt, which you'd know if you had any understanding of the subject.
Now you're trying to use the terms, but fail hard.
I never even argued there's even a single prescriptive rule, and I never would, because unlike you, this isn't the first time I'm hearing the terms and I thus don't make prescriptive arguments. You can look at my comment, it's not been edited.
Point out a single prescriptive rule I even remotely imply. Oh there isn't one?
How odd.
I know it's not, jackass. That's why I said it doesn't apply. I only brought up empiricism to address your comparison to flat earthers, which is a matter of empiricism.
But since you're so intent on butchering what I say in order to shape it into whatever nonsense argument you find easier to counter, you're clearly not interested in having a serious debate and thus I no longer take you seriously.
Goodbye.
You've just no idea how ignorant you are? :D Yes, you specifically connected it to the concept. Negative or positive, doesn't matter. It shows how you conceptualise the idea.
That's why it's so wrong.
Empiricism would constitute both descriptive and prescriptive language, only prescriptive language less so. What you're trying to do is prescribe rules to language, and because you don't even understand what youre doing, you don't even have the words for it. Which is why you're now pathetically trying to pretend you knew those words before I pointed this out to you.
It's a good comparison to flat earthers, because you're equally ignorant of your own ignorance. It's a veery different subject, but youre still quite as unable to understand what you understand as they are.
Oh yeah "I no longer take you seriously, goodbye" as if that isn't the mating cry of every fucking moron proved utterly incorrect and who has to run away in shame.
Everything you're saying is projection.
I didn't "connect" empiricism to language. You compared my argument to a flat earth argument. I debunked that claim by explaining that flat earth theory can be debunked empirically, and phonology cannot because it is not within the realm of empiricism. If that sounds like a connection to you, then it's entirely based on you connecting pronunciation to flat earth theory in the first place.
And you're being childish for trying to twist that to make it look like I made the mistake that you did.
I understand prescriptive and descriptive language just fine, and you're being arrogant by assuming that I don't. You simply can't admit that you're wrong, so you attack me as if I don't know what I'm talking about.
That's not what I'm doing at all. That's what you're doing. I argued that the people who insist that "gif" with a hard g is the only correct way are wrong and arrogant. I said I pronounce it with a soft g, as in "jif." I never said everyone must pronounce it that way, therefore I did not make a prescriptive argument
You, on the other hand, did make a prescriptive argument by saying that only the pronunciation with the hard g is the right way. So again, that's more projection.
Pot, kettle, black.
I'm not "running away in shame," I'm simply capable of recognizing when someone isn't capable of engaging in good faith argumentation, and I have more self-respect than to waste my time on people like that.