to judge me judging"? Lol. I mean usually if you judge someone who doesn't wanna be judged that's what you get back. Who are you to judge, you have no right.
Yet, does the person saying that actually have any right over whether or not you can judge?
Really crafty, 5 people disagree with you thus far! It's a very common practice. It's called a *Rhetorical question*
A question asked for the sake of emphasis that does not require an answer.
You see - the emphasis the question provides is what supplies the answer.
This is a rational way of going about answering a question because a rhetorical question more often causes the person you are answering to actually have to think than compared to whatever particular "traditional" answers you may be able to provide for the question asked.
This is why we have proverbs etc. The way an idea is packaged has as much to do with its impact on the person you communicated said idea to as the idea itself.
Get out of the philosophy section please. Judging from your answer, your mind isn't capable of doing anyone any good here.
Meilein, ah well if the person asking the question "Who are you to judge" Doesn't actually meaning judging, then why would you assume the retort actually meant judging?
I apologize melain I read your reply too quickly. You didn't say that the person "didn't actually mean judging", but that the person wasn't actually judging you, thus rendering the retort inoperable. The thing is though... that usually when a person asks that question they are being very snarky and via body language and the tone of their voice, you can see almost absolutely that they are judging you negatively because you had the "audacity" to judge them to begin with.
You see, you must take things in context -- and context has more to do with just what is said - but also how it is said. I.e. as I mentioned before, tone of voice and body language.
I made the obvious mistake of thinking that such a situation would translate fully when transposed to the realm of written word. However, I hope now with this additional detail shedding light on the type of situation I actually was referring to, people can stop nit-picking the wordage, and start focusing on how it fits contextually.
Yet, does the person saying that actually have any right over whether or not you can judge?
Really crafty, 5 people disagree with you thus far! It's a very common practice. It's called a *Rhetorical question*
A question asked for the sake of emphasis that does not require an answer.
You see - the emphasis the question provides is what supplies the answer.
This is a rational way of going about answering a question because a rhetorical question more often causes the person you are answering to actually have to think than compared to whatever particular "traditional" answers you may be able to provide for the question asked.
This is why we have proverbs etc. The way an idea is packaged has as much to do with its impact on the person you communicated said idea to as the idea itself.
Get out of the philosophy section please. Judging from your answer, your mind isn't capable of doing anyone any good here.
Meilein, ah well if the person asking the question "Who are you to judge" Doesn't actually meaning judging, then why would you assume the retort actually meant judging?
I apologize melain I read your reply too quickly. You didn't say that the person "didn't actually mean judging", but that the person wasn't actually judging you, thus rendering the retort inoperable. The thing is though... that usually when a person asks that question they are being very snarky and via body language and the tone of their voice, you can see almost absolutely that they are judging you negatively because you had the "audacity" to judge them to begin with.
You see, you must take things in context -- and context has more to do with just what is said - but also how it is said. I.e. as I mentioned before, tone of voice and body language.
I made the obvious mistake of thinking that such a situation would translate fully when transposed to the realm of written word. However, I hope now with this additional detail shedding light on the type of situation I actually was referring to, people can stop nit-picking the wordage, and start focusing on how it fits contextually.