Yes, there’s some reading comprehension issues here, but there’s also bad writing.
The original question is about size, but the Philosopher, for some reason, makes a detour into mass. This detour goes nowhere, and just ends up as a distraction to the point he’s trying to make. He could have just said, “Suppose you were to have $30 in coins instead, which would have more value, the coins or the bills?” No introduction of “mass” for no reason, just a straightforward analogy that different things can have the same value. Or, he could have kept the idea of size: “Suppose you needed to carry $30 in coins instead, would you need a bigger wallet? … Ah, but which wallet’s contents would have the greater value?”
It’s also distracting that he says “you were to have $30 in coins as well”. That makes it seem like it’s important that Anon now has $60 instead of $30. If the idea was to compare $30 in coins to $30 in bills, a better wording would be “instead”. Then you’re comparing two situations in which Anon has $30, instead of a situation where he now has $60 instead of his original $30 but half of it is now in coins.
The way it’s written is like a trick question where the obvious answer is wrong. The obvious answer is right, it just feels like it’s wrong because it’s badly written.
The original question is about size, but the Philosopher, for some reason, makes a detour into mass. This detour goes nowhere, and just ends up as a distraction to the point he’s trying to make.
Larger breasts have more mass. His point was that just like how mass is irrelevant to the value of money, it is also irrelevant to the value of breasts.
It’s also distracting that he says “you were to have $30 in coins as well”. That makes it seem like it’s important that Anon now has $60 instead of $30. If the idea was to compare $30 in coins to $30 in bills, a better wording would be “instead”.
This is where reading comprehension comes into play. You have to be able to interpret what someone is saying, even if they don’t phrase it in exactly the way that would make it easiest for you personally to understand. If you can’t parse what they meant, that is indicative of poor reading comprehension on your part. It never says nor implies that the man having $60 matters. You’re adding that to the story, and then complaining that the story doesn’t address it.
The way it’s written is like a trick question where the obvious answer is wrong.
The way it’s written is meant to lead you to the understanding that while size (and mass, which is inexorably linked to size of living tissue) can vary, breasts are still breasts, regardless of size, just as $30 is still $30 regardless of denomination. It is a trick question, and being able to recognize trick questions is an important factor in reading comprehension.
Yes, but that detail is not necessary to the story, so it is bad writing to introduce it.
You have to be able to interpret what someone is saying, even if they don’t phrase it in exactly the way that would make it easiest for you personally to understand.
In other words, if the writing is bad. Thank you for agreeing with the point I was making: the writing is bad.
Holy shit, no. How do you read what I said, repeat what I said, and then act like I said something entirely else? Are you fucking with me? Please for the love of God go back to grade school and try to work up to an 8th grade reading level before you make any more comments
Yes, there’s some reading comprehension issues here, but there’s also bad writing.
The original question is about size, but the Philosopher, for some reason, makes a detour into mass. This detour goes nowhere, and just ends up as a distraction to the point he’s trying to make. He could have just said, “Suppose you were to have $30 in coins instead, which would have more value, the coins or the bills?” No introduction of “mass” for no reason, just a straightforward analogy that different things can have the same value. Or, he could have kept the idea of size: “Suppose you needed to carry $30 in coins instead, would you need a bigger wallet? … Ah, but which wallet’s contents would have the greater value?”
It’s also distracting that he says “you were to have $30 in coins as well”. That makes it seem like it’s important that Anon now has $60 instead of $30. If the idea was to compare $30 in coins to $30 in bills, a better wording would be “instead”. Then you’re comparing two situations in which Anon has $30, instead of a situation where he now has $60 instead of his original $30 but half of it is now in coins.
The way it’s written is like a trick question where the obvious answer is wrong. The obvious answer is right, it just feels like it’s wrong because it’s badly written.
If it helps you understand better: big boobs have more mass than small boobs.
Unless the small boobs are made of white dwarf star matter.
They adult sized
Just because it was written badly doesn’t mean I didn’t understand.
The irony: you posted this because your reading comprehension was too low to understand what I wrote.
Lemme try to help you out here
Larger breasts have more mass. His point was that just like how mass is irrelevant to the value of money, it is also irrelevant to the value of breasts.
This is where reading comprehension comes into play. You have to be able to interpret what someone is saying, even if they don’t phrase it in exactly the way that would make it easiest for you personally to understand. If you can’t parse what they meant, that is indicative of poor reading comprehension on your part. It never says nor implies that the man having $60 matters. You’re adding that to the story, and then complaining that the story doesn’t address it.
The way it’s written is meant to lead you to the understanding that while size (and mass, which is inexorably linked to size of living tissue) can vary, breasts are still breasts, regardless of size, just as $30 is still $30 regardless of denomination. It is a trick question, and being able to recognize trick questions is an important factor in reading comprehension.
Yes, but that detail is not necessary to the story, so it is bad writing to introduce it.
In other words, if the writing is bad. Thank you for agreeing with the point I was making: the writing is bad.
Holy shit, no. How do you read what I said, repeat what I said, and then act like I said something entirely else? Are you fucking with me? Please for the love of God go back to grade school and try to work up to an 8th grade reading level before you make any more comments
Ok, I thought you said “even if they don’t phrase it in … the way that would make it easiest … to understand”.
So, bad writing.
Not understanding the importance of that “you personally” betrays your deficient reading comprehension
Maybe you’re just a bad writer.