Total Posts:47|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Idioms that don't make sense.

Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 10:35:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
The expression "That's a double edged sword" used to refer to something that both harm both you and your opponent, doesn't make any sense. A double-edged sword presents no significantly greater risk of harming yourself than a single edged one.

What other idioms or common expressions don't make sense?
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 4:53:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
No, it makes sense.

If you have a blade aimed at someone, and they push it into your shoulder, is has the effect of it they were pushing their blade with the same force.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 5:10:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Another idiom that has always irked me, "like comparing apples and oranges". However it's entirely reasonable to compare apples to oranges. Both are round. Both are fruits. One is red, and the other orange. Both are tasty.

I think a better expression would be "like comparing apples and algebra".
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 5:12:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 4:53:33 PM, Wnope wrote:
No, it makes sense.

If you have a blade aimed at someone, and they push it into your shoulder, is has the effect of it they were pushing their blade with the same force.

Can you re-phrase this?
Jack212
Posts: 572
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 7:45:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 5:10:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
Another idiom that has always irked me, "like comparing apples and oranges". However it's entirely reasonable to compare apples to oranges. Both are round. Both are fruits. One is red, and the other orange. Both are tasty.

I think a better expression would be "like comparing apples and algebra".

Apples and oranges are different fruits, so it's dumb to hold one to the standard of the other. "Apples and algebra" is stupid because the two are used in different contexts.

Now please stop talking, your stupidity is harmful to this site.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 8:27:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 7:45:22 PM, Jack212 wrote:
Apples and oranges are different fruits, so it's dumb to hold one to the standard of the other.

Of course they are different. Do you make a habit of comparing things which are identical? The purpose of making comparisons it to make judgements about one subject in relation to another. There are many plausible situations where you might want to compare apples to oranges. Grocery shopping for instance.

"Apples and algebra" is stupid because the two are used in different contexts.

That's precisely the point.

Now please stop talking, your stupidity is harmful to this site.

Your unnecessary invective is noted.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 8:31:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 10:35:02 AM, Polaris wrote:
The expression "That's a double edged sword" used to refer to something that both harm both you and your opponent, doesn't make any sense. A double-edged sword presents no significantly greater risk of harming yourself than a single edged one.



I am a TOTAL renaissance Festival geek!! I get dressed up like a court jester or Gypsy every year and go to the Texas Ren Fest!

So I know a thing or two about swordfighting. I am an expert. I can beat you up with a sword. (I also took fencing, which is why. But I am going to reference the warrior princes angle. because screw you that's why.)

In my very expert opinion, most long swords were not usually striking weapons, but grappling weapons. I am totally serious.

If you have a long sword, and another person has a long sword, the main objective had better be getting in so close to the other person that their sword can't hit you. Or else running away. You can forget parrying a sword strike - that is hard, and not something that you would want to bet your life that you will be able to pull off.

So double edged swords are something that I think people would want to be careful with. Because of that. Also because you have to be careful picking them up, because they are all edges and junk.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 8:41:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 8:31:14 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 9/11/2013 10:35:02 AM, Polaris wrote:
The expression "That's a double edged sword" used to refer to something that both harm both you and your opponent, doesn't make any sense. A double-edged sword presents no significantly greater risk of harming yourself than a single edged one.



I am a TOTAL renaissance Festival geek!! I get dressed up like a court jester or Gypsy every year and go to the Texas Ren Fest!

So I know a thing or two about swordfighting. I am an expert. I can beat you up with a sword. (I also took fencing, which is why. But I am going to reference the warrior princes angle. because screw you that's why.)

In my very expert opinion, most long swords were not usually striking weapons, but grappling weapons. I am totally serious.

If you have a long sword, and another person has a long sword, the main objective had better be getting in so close to the other person that their sword can't hit you. Or else running away. You can forget parrying a sword strike - that is hard, and not something that you would want to bet your life that you will be able to pull off.

So double edged swords are something that I think people would want to be careful with. Because of that. Also because you have to be careful picking them up, because they are all edges and junk.

I too have experience with swords although perhaps not to the extent that you have, however this leads me ponder whether you were disagreeing or agreeing with this statement:

"A double-edged sword presents no significantly greater risk of harming yourself than a single edged one."
Jack212
Posts: 572
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 8:58:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 8:31:14 PM, Beverlee wrote:

[ sword expert stuff ]

Your expertise is impressive. I'm an amateur with a sword, so thank you for educating me.

At 9/11/2013 8:41:59 PM, Polaris wrote:

"A double-edged sword presents no significantly greater risk of harming yourself than a single edged one."

If you get hit by the wrong edge of a single, you'll probably be bruised. If you get hit with the wrong edge of a double, say goodbye to whatever was attached there. It's not rocket science.

Though come to think of it, rocket science isn't that difficult.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 9:42:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 5:12:59 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 9/11/2013 4:53:33 PM, Wnope wrote:
No, it makes sense.

If you have a blade aimed at someone, and they push it into your shoulder, is has the effect of it they were pushing their blade with the same force.

Can you re-phrase this?

If my sword (I>) is single edged, and I am striking you from the left, it will hurt you, yes? And, if you deflect it and it comes back at me, I am hit with the broad side, so it doesn't slice.

Now, a double-edged sword (<I>) will do the same if I attack left to right. However, if it is deflected, or force is brought my way, the blade can then slice my myself. This is the danger to me.
However, since there are two edges, I can also use that to my advantage in a fight, like using the momentum of your deflection to slice the other way, or bring the blade down as it comes away. This is helpful to me.

Does that explain it?
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 9:47:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 5:10:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
Another idiom that has always irked me, "like comparing apples and oranges". However it's entirely reasonable to compare apples to oranges. Both are round. Both are fruits. One is red, and the other orange. Both are tasty.

The idea that is being expressed with this idiom is that the two items are similar, but different.
They are similar, but upon closer analysis, they are quite different.
In the same vein, it is like a felony and a misdemeanor.
They are both crimes, but they carry different sentences and consequences. So, comparing the two, just like any two pieces of round fruit, may not be a fair comparison in the context of the analysis.

I think a better expression would be "like comparing apples and algebra".
This expression doesn't convey the fact that the two things are similar at first glance.
My work here is, finally, done.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 10:13:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 9:47:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 9/11/2013 5:10:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
Another idiom that has always irked me, "like comparing apples and oranges". However it's entirely reasonable to compare apples to oranges. Both are round. Both are fruits. One is red, and the other orange. Both are tasty.

The idea that is being expressed with this idiom is that the two items are similar, but different.
They are similar, but upon closer analysis, they are quite different.
In the same vein, it is like a felony and a misdemeanor.
They are both crimes, but they carry different sentences and consequences. So, comparing the two, just like any two pieces of round fruit, may not be a fair comparison in the context of the analysis.

I think a better expression would be "like comparing apples and algebra".
This expression doesn't convey the fact that the two things are similar at first glance.

My understanding of the idiom, and how I've generally seen it used, is that two items are too dissimilar to be compared.

As in here:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 10:19:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 10:13:25 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 9/11/2013 9:47:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 9/11/2013 5:10:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
Another idiom that has always irked me, "like comparing apples and oranges". However it's entirely reasonable to compare apples to oranges. Both are round. Both are fruits. One is red, and the other orange. Both are tasty.

The idea that is being expressed with this idiom is that the two items are similar, but different.
They are similar, but upon closer analysis, they are quite different.
In the same vein, it is like a felony and a misdemeanor.
They are both crimes, but they carry different sentences and consequences. So, comparing the two, just like any two pieces of round fruit, may not be a fair comparison in the context of the analysis.

I think a better expression would be "like comparing apples and algebra".
This expression doesn't convey the fact that the two things are similar at first glance.

My understanding of the idiom, and how I've generally seen it used, is that two items are too dissimilar to be compared.

As in here:
http://en.wikipedia.org...

From the article:
"Further, the phrase "apples-with-apples comparison" is used when an attempt is made to make sure that the comparison is fair; for example, adjusting for inflation during a discussion of wages"

^ this implies the apples and oranges idiom would apply in discussing wages of 1920 and 2010 (perhaps $0.50/hr vs. $8/hr). They seem similar, but they are not. (they are both fruit (compensation for work) and they are both round (same currency), but they are not equal)

The phrase, IMO, was originally to be used to state that a comparison, while seemingly similar, in not apt.

Just because others use the phrase differently, doesn't change its original meaning.
My work here is, finally, done.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 11:02:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 9:42:10 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
If my sword (I>) is single edged, and I am striking you from the left, it will hurt you, yes? And, if you deflect it and it comes back at me, I am hit with the broad side, so it doesn't slice.

Now, a double-edged sword (<I>) will do the same if I attack left to right. However, if it is deflected, or force is brought my way, the blade can then slice my myself. This is the danger to me.
However, since there are two edges, I can also use that to my advantage in a fight, like using the momentum of your deflection to slice the other way, or bring the blade down as it comes away. This is helpful to me.

Does that explain it?

The problem I see with this is that the likelihood of a sword being reflected directly back at the wielder in such a manner is quite slim. The length of the human arm would require the wrists to bend at an unnatural angle to cut oneself with their own sword. Most blocked or parried blows are simply going to glance off of their target.

Furthermore the idiom seems to imply that the disadvantage is guaranteed. There is no guarantee that a double-edged sword with cut the wielder, it is at best a slim possibility.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2013 11:11:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 10:19:26 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
From the article:
"Further, the phrase "apples-with-apples comparison" is used when an attempt is made to make sure that the comparison is fair; for example, adjusting for inflation during a discussion of wages"

^ this implies the apples and oranges idiom would apply in discussing wages of 1920 and 2010 (perhaps $0.50/hr vs. $8/hr). They seem similar, but they are not. (they are both fruit (compensation for work) and they are both round (same currency), but they are not equal)


The phrase, IMO, was originally to be used to state that a comparison, while seemingly similar, in not apt.

I don't see how you are coming to that conclusion based on the information provided. There is no mention of prima facie similarities in either idiom, nor anywhere in the wiki entry.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2013 11:16:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 5:12:59 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 9/11/2013 4:53:33 PM, Wnope wrote:
No, it makes sense.

If you have a blade aimed at someone, and they push it into your shoulder, is has the effect of it they were pushing their blade with the same force.

Can you re-phrase thi

Say you're standing in front of Bob holding a double-edged sword so a sharp side is pointed at Bob.

Bob has a metal rod. He pushes the metal rod against your sword. Because you are weak, the rod pushes the edged sword into you. With enough force, the sword cuts you instead of cutting him.

If you had pushed harder, he would be wounded with the double edged sword. But since he pushed harder, you were wounded.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2013 5:14:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/13/2013 3:34:51 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Can anyone explain:
Kick the bucket to mean "to die"?

Although the origin of this phrase is not certain, one common theory is that when a person is being hanged, they are typically elevated so that they can achieve enough velocity to snap the neck on the first attempt, and sometimes a bucket would be used for this purpose, and could be conveniently kicked away.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2013 5:24:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/12/2013 11:16:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 9/11/2013 5:12:59 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 9/11/2013 4:53:33 PM, Wnope wrote:
No, it makes sense.

If you have a blade aimed at someone, and they push it into your shoulder, is has the effect of it they were pushing their blade with the same force.

Can you re-phrase thi

Say you're standing in front of Bob holding a double-edged sword so a sharp side is pointed at Bob.

Bob has a metal rod. He pushes the metal rod against your sword. Because you are weak, the rod pushes the edged sword into you. With enough force, the sword cuts you instead of cutting him.

If you had pushed harder, he would be wounded with the double edged sword. But since he pushed harder, you were wounded.

I don't see this as being a particularly likely scenario, thus why I don't think the idiom makes much sense. The idiom "double-edged sword" implies a guaranteed disadvantage, while the actual chance of cutting oneself with their own sword seems pretty unlikely.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2013 9:13:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/13/2013 5:14:31 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 9/13/2013 3:34:51 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Can anyone explain:
Kick the bucket to mean "to die"?

Although the origin of this phrase is not certain, one common theory is that when a person is being hanged, they are typically elevated so that they can achieve enough velocity to snap the neck on the first attempt, and sometimes a bucket would be used for this purpose, and could be conveniently kicked away.

That. However, they weren't elevated to snap the neck. They were elevated enough such that the rope would strangle them.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2013 1:53:38 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/13/2013 5:24:01 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 9/12/2013 11:16:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 9/11/2013 5:12:59 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 9/11/2013 4:53:33 PM, Wnope wrote:
No, it makes sense.

If you have a blade aimed at someone, and they push it into your shoulder, is has the effect of it they were pushing their blade with the same force.

Can you re-phrase thi

Say you're standing in front of Bob holding a double-edged sword so a sharp side is pointed at Bob.

Bob has a metal rod. He pushes the metal rod against your sword. Because you are weak, the rod pushes the edged sword into you. With enough force, the sword cuts you instead of cutting him.

If you had pushed harder, he would be wounded with the double edged sword. But since he pushed harder, you were wounded.

I don't see this as being a particularly likely scenario, thus why I don't think the idiom makes much sense. The idiom "double-edged sword" implies a guaranteed disadvantage, while the actual chance of cutting oneself with their own sword seems pretty unlikely.

It implies that it is possible for a particular weapon to be used against oneself.

That's all the idiom claims to mean. The idiom doesn't necessarily mean the chances of the weapon hurting you are equal to the chances of it not.

If something is a "double edged sword" then it isn't necessarily going to be bad, but it could be bad. For instance "I am famous" is a double edged sword since on one hand you can get friends, power, riches, etc while on the other hand you might get stalked or targeted by nutcases.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2013 9:13:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/11/2013 5:10:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
Another idiom that has always irked me, "like comparing apples and oranges". However it's entirely reasonable to compare apples to oranges. Both are round. Both are fruits. One is red, and the other orange. Both are tasty.

I think a better expression would be "like comparing apples and algebra".

If you understand the concept the phrase is intended to convey, then, by definition, it "makes sense."

Unless you're arguing that you didn't understand what those phrases meant and someone had to explain it to you.
YYW
Posts: 36,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2013 10:09:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/14/2013 9:13:47 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 9/11/2013 5:10:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
Another idiom that has always irked me, "like comparing apples and oranges". However it's entirely reasonable to compare apples to oranges. Both are round. Both are fruits. One is red, and the other orange. Both are tasty.

I think a better expression would be "like comparing apples and algebra".

If you understand the concept the phrase is intended to convey, then, by definition, it "makes sense."

Unless you're arguing that you didn't understand what those phrases meant and someone had to explain it to you.

Best. Response. Ever.
Tsar of DDO
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2013 11:02:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/14/2013 9:13:47 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 9/11/2013 5:10:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
Another idiom that has always irked me, "like comparing apples and oranges". However it's entirely reasonable to compare apples to oranges. Both are round. Both are fruits. One is red, and the other orange. Both are tasty.

I think a better expression would be "like comparing apples and algebra".

If you understand the concept the phrase is intended to convey, then, by definition, it "makes sense."

Unless you're arguing that you didn't understand what those phrases meant and someone had to explain it to you.

There is a difference between something being understandable and it making logical sense.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2013 11:07:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/14/2013 1:53:38 AM, Wnope wrote:
It implies that it is possible for a particular weapon to be used against oneself.

That's all the idiom claims to mean. The idiom doesn't necessarily mean the chances of the weapon hurting you are equal to the chances of it not.

If something is a "double edged sword" then it isn't necessarily going to be bad, but it could be bad. For instance "I am famous" is a double edged sword since on one hand you can get friends, power, riches, etc while on the other hand you might get stalked or targeted by nutcases.

In that case it would make sense if the unintentional disadvantage were unlikely but possible. However generally I don't see it used that way. When people use the term "double-edged sword" the disadvantage is typically equally weighted (or close to it) to the advantage.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2013 12:19:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/14/2013 11:02:25 AM, Polaris wrote:
At 9/14/2013 9:13:47 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 9/11/2013 5:10:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
Another idiom that has always irked me, "like comparing apples and oranges". However it's entirely reasonable to compare apples to oranges. Both are round. Both are fruits. One is red, and the other orange. Both are tasty.

I think a better expression would be "like comparing apples and algebra".

If you understand the concept the phrase is intended to convey, then, by definition, it "makes sense."

Unless you're arguing that you didn't understand what those phrases meant and someone had to explain it to you.

There is a difference between something being understandable and it making logical sense.

Yes, and when you talk about something "making sense" we are talking about the ability to understand it (though that may overlap with logical soundness).

Regardless, these are literaty devices and figures of speech BY DESIGN, their point is to convey a concept.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2013 1:10:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/14/2013 12:19:38 PM, drafterman wrote:
Yes, and when you talk about something "making sense" we are talking about the ability to understand it

Not necessarily. The ability to comprehend a statement is no evidence that the statement is logically coherent. Although closely related the two are not identical.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2013 1:17:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/14/2013 1:10:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 9/14/2013 12:19:38 PM, drafterman wrote:
Yes, and when you talk about something "making sense" we are talking about the ability to understand it

Not necessarily. The ability to comprehend a statement is no evidence that the statement is logically coherent. Although closely related the two are not identical.

I'm not saying they're identical. I'm saying "makes sense" refers to the understanding part, not the logical part.