• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Crushing gravel and other mining waste into sand isn’t quite “artificial” sand…

    Like how there’s no such thing as an artificial diamond, just a man made one.

    The sand is sand, it’s just mand made.

    • Davel23@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      20 hours ago

      artificial adjective ar·​ti·​fi·​cial ˌär-tə-ˈfi-shᵊl 1 a : made, produced, or done by humans especially to seem like something natural : man-made an artificial reef artificial sweetener an artificial limb artificial diamonds

    • DrakeAlbrecht@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      There isn’t sand. Humans did a thing. There’s sand.

      There isn’t a diamond. Humans did a thing. There’s a diamond.

      Those are the literal definitions of “artificial”.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        25
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Now compare my examples to:

        Artificial wood paneling

        Do you see the difference now?

        Could you possibly get magine a word where the two examples I gave were intentionally similar and I wasn’t giving every possible permeation?

        You didn’t understand what I said, which is fine, fucking normal even…

        But instead of asking questions, you stated the obvious.

        We could have had a deep philosophical, physical, even material science conversation about this. Or rather I’d have elaborated and youd have played the part of a rubber duck.

        But instead you just said whatever the fuck popped into your head in the moment

        • partofthevoice@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          We could have had a deep philosophical … conversation about this.

          Except you fell for the same trap hundreds of thousands of philosophers before you had. Talking right past people because you refuse to understand what they meant by the words they chose to use.

          “Artificial” describes the process something underwent to become what it is. It doesn’t mean that it’s materially different than its natural counterpart.

          So what’s ironic is that the deeply philosophical conversation you referenced; that conversation could have happened, but instead you chose to hop on your high horse and argue nonsense about material differences while the argument was really about procedural differences.

          Had you rose your point, reasonably and fairly so, as a congruent but also slightly off-topic one, it might have been entertained more meaningfully.