this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
564 points (97.5% liked)
Strange Planet by Nathan W. Pyle
7478 readers
420 users here now
A community dedicated to Strange Planet comics by Nathan W. Pyle.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Not sure I get this one...
It implies that book alien does not think the debate would be entertaining so the debate would be about if the debate was entertaining. It’s a similar concept to the Monty Python “I came here for an argument” skit where the argument ended up being on whether being contrary was the only need to have an argument.
No it isnt
Yes it is
Noitisn't
You cannot prove that it isn't however. And until you can prove that it isn't, by virtue of not being proven, it has not been proven. And as such it has not been proven and is therefore unproven. So yes it is.
A claim without evidence can be rejected without evidence!
Yes I can!
No you can't.
Don't give me that, you snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings!
Ah, ok. Thanks!
In my opinion, the alien in the right pulled a fast one. He set up a joke. When the left alien asked if he thought a debate would be fun, the right one said “in my opinion.”
It doubles as both an affirmative—“yes it would be fun”—and as an inconsequential opinion which is the start of an argument or debate.
That’s why the alien on the left points at the other. As if to say “ah I see what you did there!”
Edit: ah notice the little smile and the sneaky squinting eyes on the alien to the right in the final panel. So smug that he made a funny 😆
Alien on the left is about to debate whether or not that would even be entertaining. The point of the comic is that debating our opinions with each other is stupid because they don't matter and it's not even fun.
That's a really cynical read of what's obviously a lighthearted joke.
The joke in the last panel is that the book alien is stuck in a paradox. if they choose to engage in this debate, they would have to take the contrary position that engaging in a debate would not be fun. But by engaging in the debate, they would actually negate that argument, because you still participated in the debate.
Calling your own personal interpretation obvious is pretty silly. Also, the entire comic is pretty cynical, but it's also lighthearted...so to each their own. I overstated it in a rush to get ready for work and can acknowledge your view on that paradox, but I maintain that the overarching moral is that it is still pointless to debate that which amounts to personal opinion.