BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.worldM to InsanePeopleFacebook@lemmy.world · 1 年前Sovcit doesn't understand.lemmy.worldexternal-linkmessage-square41fedilinkarrow-up1310arrow-down15
arrow-up1305arrow-down1external-linkSovcit doesn't understand.lemmy.worldBonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.worldM to InsanePeopleFacebook@lemmy.world · 1 年前message-square41fedilink
minus-squareFlying Squid@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up78arrow-down1·1 年前I think someone’s going to be taught a few laws…
minus-squarePunnyName@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up48·1 年前No. One of my favorite insults is: “Just because you didn’t learn, doesn’t mean they didn’t teach.”
minus-squaresome_guy@lemmy.sdf.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up7·1 年前Not when you only have two brain cells orbiting within an empty head.
minus-squarepearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.onlinelinkfedilinkarrow-up5·1 年前They aren’t mutually inclusive.
minus-squarestate_electrician@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 年前“So next time someone’s teaching why don’t you get taught.” implies that getting taught requires someone teaching, but does not automatically follow said teaching.
minus-squareemeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 年前No but it does imply that getting taught requires learning, which is what the OP actually says instead of teaching.
I think someone’s going to be taught a few laws…
Does teaching imply learning?
No. One of my favorite insults is:
“Just because you didn’t learn, doesn’t mean they didn’t teach.”
Not when you only have two brain cells orbiting within an empty head.
Orbiting implies gravity. Gravity implies mass.
Checks out, they’re extremely dense
Fighting for second place.
They aren’t mutually inclusive.
“So next time someone’s teaching why don’t you get taught.” implies that getting taught requires someone teaching, but does not automatically follow said teaching.
No but it does imply that getting taught requires learning, which is what the OP actually says instead of teaching.