> You appear to be arguing something like "I couldn't mean ablate, since it doesn't fit the context, so why mention it". Well, whether you meant it or not, you did write it, and you could very well have done it because you thought it meant "oblate".
This is a pretty stunning thing to write after I've already had to point out to someone else that I didn't write the sentence in question. Did you read my comment before responding to it?
Now consider this sentence:
> "Ablate" was the wrong word for your intended meaning
If I respond "but this makes no sense; to 'wrong' is to unfairly cause harm", would that be a good argument? Would it constitute any evidence of any kind about your usage of the word "wrong"?
Obviously not, but it's exactly the same as the original argument I responded to, "to 'ablate' is to erode".
This is a pretty stunning thing to write after I've already had to point out to someone else that I didn't write the sentence in question. Did you read my comment before responding to it?
Now consider this sentence:
> "Ablate" was the wrong word for your intended meaning
If I respond "but this makes no sense; to 'wrong' is to unfairly cause harm", would that be a good argument? Would it constitute any evidence of any kind about your usage of the word "wrong"?
Obviously not, but it's exactly the same as the original argument I responded to, "to 'ablate' is to erode".