"Imply" vs. "Infer"

For those of us fascinated with the written word, Twitter and its 140 character limit presents serious challenges. Users often need to use multiple messages to be clear in conversation or debate. Sometimes they don’t manage it very well. For example:

There’s nothing clear about it. With this single message, what is being said?

From an author’s viewpoint, what is being implied?

@The stupid(ity of these people). It BURRRNNNNNSSSS (them)! Yes(, you fools). (Of course you would think) I created the algorithm at WordPress AND ReverbNation (because you are idiots). SARC It was ALL ME! /SARC #dopes

This could be the intent of the author sending this tweet.

But it may not be the message received by the reader.

The difference between what an author wishes to say and what the audience understands is the difference between implication and inference. What might a reader infer from the same message?

The beautiful thing about that answer is that it is bounded by nothing at all.

Except the reader’s imagination.

The stupid(ity leaking out of my brain). It BURRRNNNNNSSSS (ME)! Yes(, indeed). (In my spare time, and for no pay, which is quite important to me, because I’m dirt poor and everyone knows it,) I created the algorithm at WordPress AND ReverbNation. (Because I’m a GENIUS!!) It was ALL ME! You #dopes

What is the truth? Probably somewhere in between. But it’s so easy to vomit up a 140 character message that really doesn’t mean what you think means.

Interpretation can be SO subjective.


Author: Paul Krendler

The Thinking Man's Zombie

13 thoughts on “"Imply" vs. "Infer"”

  1. One of the difficulties in having what you write actually state what you intend is that you must have some clear thought to intend communicating in the first place. BS does not have thoughts, let alone clear ones: he has emotions (most of them disgusting to normal people of course). Someone earlier today pointed out that BS knows full well the difference between immediate cause and effective cause. Shit did not arrive at his tin can because someone in Slovakia spontaneously picked BS's name and address out of hat and sent him shit far less stinky that BS's own behavior. Someone well aware of BS initiated the chain of causes that ended up with BS ranting about postal inspectors, etc. So what is the difference between initiating a contact via wordpress and initiating a contact via some horse farm in Slovakia? The difference is entirely in BS's feelings. He does not like receiving shit in the mail; he does like harassing Hoge. What is logic compared to his sublime(ly absurd) feelings.

    I have said multiple times: I do not believe that BS is particularly stupid intellectually. Unlike, however, most people who have a personality more developed than a 12 year old's, he never allows any cognitive function to interfere with his passionate narcissism. During the dark of the night, he must wonder how an intelligence as penetrating as he believes his to be has left him the laughing stock of the Internet and an economic and familial failure, No one else wonders: we know the answer.

  2. I'm SO excited about his gift tomorrow. He's going to be FLOORED by it!!!! I just hope he doesn't have any cuts or abrasions on his hands. That could be REALLY nasty. And Gail? She just needs to NOT use it for what it looks like its intended for. That could result in IV antibiotics.

  3. I can infer, from his tweets that are shown here, that Bill is mean, rude, and uncouth.

    I am implying that he is a mendacious twatwaffle.

  4. Oh wise zombie horde... could you help me out, please?


    I thought I was pretty familiar with the US Bill of Rights but can't recall where the "right to a widget" falls. I don't even recall the "right to a widget" being discussed in the federalist papers. Does anyone know where in the US code one would find a citizen's "right to a widget"? Or MD code?

    Yeah, the stupid really should burn the bildo. hahahaha "right to a widget" hahahahaha

    I so wish the contempt hearing could be live-streamed. You know, maybe we should have a zombie meet up so we can all see Oliver Wendell Jones explain to the court about his natural "right to a widget." hahahahahahahaha

    Oh my... I just had a thought and am offering a reward for whomever can find it: The pedophile probably filed suit from prison demanding his "right to a widget."


    When word gets around, there will probably be many jailhouse lawyers likewise filing suit for their "right to a widget."

    Yeah, I know, it's not any more stupid than so much that comes out of that twitter handle, but this one just made me laugh soooo much! hahahahaha "right to a widget" hahahahaha

      1. If you were to shoot someone would you shoot that same person a week later? Did you know you shot that person in the first place? Did your widget tell you the person you had shot? And if that person had a restraining order against you, did you knowingly violate that order when you shot him the second time?

  5. The rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are not the only ones we have. In fact, the Ninth Amendment says that explicitly. The Cabin Boy™ has temporarily lost some of his rights as a result of his behavior that led to a peace order being issued against him. There was an adversarial hearing—which he blew off, effectively waiving his right to due process. I believe that he has disobeyed the court's order and have asked the court to hold him in contempt.

    We'll see what happens.

  6. If he has "no way to keep a third-party application from being misused", then he shouldn't have it enabled on his accounts. That is his legal responsibility due to the restrictions placed on him by the court. He, in fact, does NOT have a "right to a widget" in this instance.


Comments are closed.