Which just shows that communicating through sarcasm brings more harm than benefit.
I know, I'm guilty. Currently on "sarcasm rehab" for the sake of people around me and myself.
I know, I'm guilty. Currently on "sarcasm rehab" for the sake of people around me and myself.
Problems with that.. people get tired of people continuing to yank chains for no good reason (cry wolf). And other people are busy with their own lines of thought and lives. So instead of the intended (wow we understand each other/so close!), 25% (* ) of the time instead the receiver thinks "hmm he's probably in a bad mood today?!" So, net effect is instead often to be viewed as grumpy moody.
Famously, kids don't parse sarcasm well, neither at them or others. My grandfather, who was, in retrospect, actually rather cool, was viewed as semihostile by us kids, because he often phrased his terms of endearment sarcastically. Net result was that we thought he didn't like us much, merely tolerated us. That is what macho sarcasm got him.
Now I am his age, with similarly bad habits. I guess my kids will end up sarcastic too.
( * *) A number I scientifically arrived at by pulling it directly from my posterior.
In reality, it takes very little intelligence to say the opposite of what you mean. Once I reflected on it, I really think it’s such an adolescent way of thinking.
If you think you’re smart, then challenge yourself to make a great joke, instead of just saying !(thing).
An adolescent way of thinking would be deriding sarcasm as beneath you intellectually.
It’s an attempt to compel the reader into understanding their own flawed rationale by presenting an argument under the reader’s pretense that is obviously flawed.
But you were confused by it and didn't understand the point I was trying to make?
In fairness, devmor's jab was rude and uncalled for. However responding to an accusation that you're immature by behaving childishly is really kind of weird.
> But you were confused by it and didn't understand the point I was trying to make?
The confusing part is that it doesn't seem to support your position. Devmor's claim was essentially that sarcasm as a rhetorical device can be abused but isn't inherently bad if used correctly. You then used sarcasm in what Devmor would probably characterize as an incorrect adolescent manner to prove the point that it is annoying. However everyone already agreed that adolescent sarcasm is annoying. Presumably your intent was to demonstrate via example why sarcasm is bad or in the words you quoted, to "[present] an argument under the reader's pretense that is obviously flawed". This didn't work because nobody claimed sarcasm was a universal good, only that in certain situations it could be used to good rhetorical affect. You made a flawed argument, but it wasn't using the pretense of the person you were responding to.
To summarize, its confusing because you are arguing against a strawman. Instead of skewering the parent's argument, which i presume was the intent, it instead just made it look like you don't understand the person you are responding to.