Difference between revisions of "So what"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(three shall be the number of the counting...) |
(bookstops) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
* I do not see how what you just said alters the outcome of our discussion. | * I do not see how what you just said alters the outcome of our discussion. | ||
* I do not see the logical connection between what you just said and the current topic. | * I do not see the logical connection between what you just said and the current topic. | ||
| + | * I do not have time or energy to investigate your [[bookstop]] and attempt to divine its applicability to the current discussion; you will need to summarize and explain if you wish your linkspam to be considered relevant. | ||
While its use is often dismissed as an immature tactic for avoiding [[rational]] debate, it is actually an entirely reasonable (if extremely compact) expression of basic [[skepticism]]. | While its use is often dismissed as an immature tactic for avoiding [[rational]] debate, it is actually an entirely reasonable (if extremely compact) expression of basic [[skepticism]]. | ||
Latest revision as of 18:43, 7 October 2015
About
"So what?", a common phrase in the American vernacular, more or less stands for one or more of the following arguments:
- I am not clear what conclusion you are attempting to imply with what you just said.
- I do not see how what you just said alters the outcome of our discussion.
- I do not see the logical connection between what you just said and the current topic.
- I do not have time or energy to investigate your bookstop and attempt to divine its applicability to the current discussion; you will need to summarize and explain if you wish your linkspam to be considered relevant.
While its use is often dismissed as an immature tactic for avoiding rational debate, it is actually an entirely reasonable (if extremely compact) expression of basic skepticism.