this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2024
62 points (86.9% liked)

Showerthoughts

29819 readers
605 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
vatlark@lemmy.world
forkball@lemmy.world
quinten@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
62
When people say two things "cannot be compared", they had to compare them to come to this conclusion. Are 'dissimilar' or 'unequal' better words? (lemm.ee)
submitted 4 months ago by Spzi@lemm.ee to c/showerthoughts@lemmy.world
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

What they actually mean is rather "these two things are very dissimilar", or "these two things are unequal".

I guess in most situations "cannot be compared" could be replaced by "cannot be equated", with less lingual inaccuracy and still the same message conveyed.

To come to the conclusion that two things are very dissimilar, very unequal, one necessarily has to compare them. So it's rather odd to come up with "cannot be compared" after just literally comparing them.

For example, bikes and cars. We compare them by looking at each's details, and finding any dissimilarities. They have a different amount of wheels. Different propulsion methods. Different price, and so on.

When this list becomes very long, or some details have a major meaning which should not be equated, people say they cannot be compared.

An example with a major meaning difference: Some people say factory farming of animals and the Holocaust are very similar, or something alike. Others disagree, presumably because they feel wether it's humans or animals being treated, the motives or whatnot make a difference big enough that the two should not be ~~compared~~ equated.

Can you follow my thoughts? Are 'dissimilar' or 'unequal' better terms? I'd be especially interested in arguments in favor of 'compared'.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 16 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I see it as more like : these thinga are too dissimilar to be compared meaningfully. Like if some article says which is the best tool? And they give you a rake, a network router, and a nailgun. Then you meed context. You can make a matrix of differences and similarities but depends what you are trying to compare. Comparing could be: All are durable, All save time on tasks, All can break with misuse.
But can also be nailgun and router is bad for raking leaves.

[–] thedudeabides@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 4 months ago

Yeah this, "cannot be compared" is meant to imply "Their comparison yields no meaningful conclusion"

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

these thinga are too dissimilar to be compared meaningfully. Like if some article says which is the best tool? And they give you a rake, a network router, and a nailgun. Then you meed context.

I think to OPs point though, is that all of those two things can be compared. The context of the article is what makes them incomparable. But if you asked me to compare a router to a nailgun I could talk durability, power draw, intended function, materials, relative ability to make it through TSA, etc etc.

Literally no two things are fundamentally incomparable. Things are only incomparable in specific contexts.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You repeat exactly what you quoted me on...you need context to compare

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

No, things always have inherent context by nature of being things. Context can be used to make things incomparable, but they're always inherently comparable without explicit context needing to be provided. This is literally the entire basis of the game 20 Questions.