[dsc]

"constructive criticism <> mockery
pointless vicious criticism = mockery"

I think one can also say that criticism at least tries to be reasonable, while mockery is just a form of persecution.

[starbase]

["constructive criticism <> mockery
pointless vicious criticism = mockery"

I think one can also say that criticism at least tries to be reasonable, while mockery is just a form of persecution.]

Yes, I agree with you, except for one, tiny, little, hyper-legalistic point. That is that those who practice mockery will invariably choose something like a missing limb or an identifiable cultural characteristic, like religious affiliation, and mock according to this. Therefore it is ultimately a selection based on reason, however base, childish, and idiotic that reason may be.

It was Socrates who (in a dialog written by Plato) said something along the lines of "and who can we turn to for help in this question? Why it is invariably that practitioner of philosophy, our friend, the dog! He chooses what he likes and dislikes according to a test of knowledge, does he not? If he likes it he wags his tail, if not, he barks!!!"

Or words to that effect. Hyper-legalistic to be sure, nevertheless it does demonstrate that there is a minuscule degree of reason even in base, dog-like mockery, minuscule, tiny, but a shred of reason nevertheless. Please excuse the hyper-legality!!!!

Regards,

starbase