Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
It's not possessive association though, it's inclusive. Semantically, there's a very large difference
And Textcritic isn't arrogant, he's just highfalutin. He always writes like that.
It's really semantics, but does infer a level of entitlement to decisions and results, so it's not all semantics. Especially when discussing money.
Your examples are not accurate either. You are Canadian by definition. You are also human by definition.
Your level of attachment and purchasing power doesn't entitle you to any results or decisions.
|
FWIW I had not intended to call Textcritic arrogant. I usually enjoy his "highfalutin" posts. The example I gave of arrogance was not one Textcritic had used.
Your opening line in response (in bold) is incomplete or unclear. Inclusive of what?
My examples are valid. Being human by definition does not entitle me to any say in American (or Soviet, or even Canadian) space programs. It is only the reason by which we can associate.
You are correct that my level of attachment and purchasing power doesn't entitle me to any results or decisions. I never claimed it did, but it does entitle me to an interest and to voice my opinion on our [mutual interest] team.
Edit - sorry for the cont. thread derail. Truce.
GO FLAMES GO. Going to be a difficult one tonight.