[__sisyphus__]

I'm not sure I agree with the author here. I do understand the point, but it seems like a rather rigid and reductive understanding.

Sure, if you're only ever responding with sarcasm it's going to have an effect similar to what the author describes—it brings a certain insincerity to the progression of a conversation, especially in groups. But not every conversation or idle thought needs a well-reasoned dialectic attached to it. And parsing out every idea logically is often tedious and tiresome.

It feels like the author is really talking about some other, larger societal issue—intellectual laziness. And while sarcasm might be an overused tool for the many who cannot be bothered to engage in actual discussions, sarcasm in itself is certainly not the enemy here.