don't have a problem with the word being used if that is the subject matter to begin with.
Yes. Because you think the use is justified by the context, right?
Tarantino thinks the use of the word is justified by context in his films. So you both make an argument from context.
I don't think your use of the word here is justified by context. You probably disagree. You don't think Tarantino's use of the word is justified by context. He definitely disagrees.
And it can't reasonably be of any importance or use to anybody anywhere that
you disagree with Tarantino's use being justified by context. Because you are not the arbiter of these things. But that is his argument, which is essentially the same as yours. This is not difficult to grasp.
But you don't actually want to debate this, do you? You just wanted to use the word in the hope of getting a reaction and then to throw what you imagine to be 'insults' around such as 'child' and '12 year old'. Your choice of insults tells us more than you may have intended about your own adolescent mindset, so I'll leave you to your drivelling insecurities.
reply
share
LiquidOcelot (2300)
8 months ago
Yes. Because you think the use is justified by the context, right?
Tarantino thinks the use of the word is justified by context in his films. So you both make an argument from context.
Your argument is completely nonsensical and i'm sure you're aware of it. I am referencing the dialogue in his movie to make a point, I am not superfluously using the word throughout a 30+ year filmography. It's akin to reprimanding someone for describing the verbal abuse they received and then treating them as the culprit for using the same words. Pathetic and childish debating tactic.
The context argument doesn't work either. There are countless instances where the word is thrown around for the sake of it and has no contextual basis.
reply
share
capuchin (2676)
8 months ago
The context argument is the one you are using, even if for some obscure reason you are unaware of it.
You are effectively claiming that your use of the word is contextually justified, but that Tarantino's is not. But you aren't the person to make that judgement. You can have an opinion on it, because anyone can, but you aren't any kind of accepted authority on the matter.
Again, if you justify your use of the word through context, it's permissible for anyone else to do so. Whether you think something is justified by its context is immaterial to my argument and hasn't at any stage entered into it.
If you were to tell me that the word should never be used, you would at least have a consistent position. But instead you're telling me that it can be used in some contexts. Tarantino would evidently agree with you. He just wouldn't agree with you on which contexts justify it and which do not.
And I can assure you, he's put a lot more thought into the matter -- and fielded a lot more questions on the topic -- than you ever have or will.
reply
share
LiquidOcelot (2300)
8 months ago
You are effectively claiming that your use of the word is contextually justified
And this is where your entire argument falls flat. I am not using the word, I am describing someone else's use of the word. There is a distinct difference. Either you're purposefully acting obtuse or you have an autistic linear thought process. I'm not sure which one it is.
And I can assure you, he's put a lot more thought into the matter -- and fielded a lot more questions on the topic -- than you ever have or will.
Again, another useless argument. Every filmmaker on this website has put more thought and fielded more questions on the topic of their movies. That is not a requirement to post on these boards, nor does it negate any criticism of a filmmaker. Secondly, he has an incentive to defend himself whether it's right or wrong. He is not the judge/jury on the criticism of his movies, the audience are. And it is a common criticism that he overuses the N-word in his movies.
Like I said, your arguments are childish and intellectually dishonest. Keep 'em coming though, you seem like you enjoy being taken down a peg.
reply
share
capuchin (2676)
8 months ago
I am not using the word, I am describing someone else's use of the word.
And that's how you're justifying its use -- through context.
That is not a requirement to post on these boards, nor does it negate any criticism of a filmmaker.
I never said it did. Not even remotely.
He is not the judge/jury on the criticism of his movies, the audience are.
He's doing the same thing you are: arguing from context. If you can, so can he. Again: you are not the authority here.
But you aren't equal to this discussion, so we'll end it here.
reply
share
LiquidOcelot (2300)
8 months ago
And that's how you're justifying its use -- through context.
Again, you're using a linear thought process and purposefully acting obtuse. Since you want to continue being intellectually dishonest and repeat yourself, I will do the same.
I am not using the word, I am describing someone else's use of the word. There is a distinct difference. Either you're purposefully acting obtuse or you have an autistic linear thought process. I'm not sure which one it is.
He's doing the same thing you are: arguing from context. If you can, so can he.
He's free to defend himself, but the audience are also free to criticise. So we're going round in circles here and your posts have been completely pointless. Run along now.
reply
share