I’m a bit confused here.
Calum Thomson

So if it’s hyperbole then the ‘meaning’ freed from the specifics of language is open to the interpretation of the reader. ‘Meaning’ is then open to a much wider interpretation when he’s being this careless with it. In a sense he’s asking you to do the work in explaining him rather than doing the work himself and he’s got the cheek to disavow interpretation that doesn’t suit him. He’s actually being quite deliberately reckless with meaning. So I’m going to say he is a provocateur, he doesn’t care what his insults ‘mean’ because the way he goes about it is to disavow the consequences of interpretation.

Which has gone off in his post modern sophist face.

So I’m going to say that you’re wrong about Milo caring about what he says. Also if meaning us up in the air then the tendency is to devolve into frightened ,angry emotional response, as both sides have been doing in this post truth intellectual environment. He was playing a very dangerous game and I’m not sorry to see him meet a sticky end.

Like what you read? Give Calum Thomson a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.