“I see that we still don’t understand each other! Neither I nor Italians, in general, think that philosophy is a waste of time. Far from it.”
That seems to be a problem with your self awareness, not whether we understand each other. This is an empty gesture to post in your native language and have others do the work you should be doing to help them understand your position. It’s lazy, and that is putting it kindly. I am doing exactly what you could be doing and there doesn’t seem to be any significant barriers to understanding the translated text.
“I meant that pragmatically, the substance lies in the first part of the answer, in the rest of the speech we are talking about ideals and abstract concepts that are sometimes difficult to put into practice without a correct synthesis.”
It took more work on your part to speak theory that you are admitting you cannot provide a consistent result for, than it would have been to just admit you were trying to be dishonest and acted in bad faith. The issue at hand is your use of the description that this topic is a “waste of time.” That is a subjective opinion based on what you think the subject of this topic is, or should be. The purpose of it is to get an idea about exactly what you are complaining about, and what everyone else is saying.
The community is made up of people with real diversity in background and thought. We also need to see where time is best used and wasted as it pertains to the goals of the project. That is only going to come from asking people in a centralized location. Good, and bad ideas must be proven in such a way. Through discussion and debate.
“There is a saying that sums this up and it is “we are frying the air” said in a joking way. I hope your translator correctly reports what I mean.”
Again, that is lazy and an unreasonable expectation that you cannot articulate what you mean in your language let alone that it be translated accurately into another. It proves my point that things said in one culture may be deemed offensive in other cultures when translated. I don’t think interactions like that should be censored. There should be a common goal to be understood and debate things without needing to meet every single person’s expectation of comfort.
I think that, “we are frying the air,” contextually means we are just “talking with heated words and not getting anywhere”. That assumes I am using heated words. I’m not. I’m using words and concepts which you do not agree with. Therefore, I am not taking any responsibility for starting any such heated argument. I do not control other people’s emotions and responses. That would make other people my slaves, and I do not condone any such relationship.
