There is an old saying in Japan, like this:

"About a fool and a pair of sissors, it depends on how you use whether it is useful or not."

Generally, in Japan, we should not call a fool "a fool", even though he/she is really a fool, as well as many foreign countries. So we cannot call a fool "a fool", like calling a desk "a desk" or a chair "a chair", and so on, just  because it is only a fact. As a result, when calling a fool, we use some "metaphor", or ironical way of saying or something. And the purpose is to use a fool and to make him/her do something or not do something. "Metaphor" or some ways of saying is only a method. Not quite a few foreigners can think and actually think that the Japanese do not tell a fact as a fact. In my opinion, when the Japanese do not tell a fact straight, they/we are going to achieve some goal, and not telling a fact or telling the fact in another way of saying is the method to achieve the goal.

For example, sitting on a "desk" is the method for taking a rest, when there are no chairs near oneself and there is only a desk. The goal is to take a rest and the method is to use the desk like a chair. If you want to say, "a fact is a fact", then "a desk is a desk" so you can only use a desk as a desk and cannot use a desk for a chair, i. e. you cannot sit on the "desk" and you can sit on only a chair which you cannot find near yourself.

"A fact is a fact."

"A fool is a fool."

"A desk is a desk."

"A chair is a chair."

If there is a chair in front of you, and nothing else in the room, why do you call "it" a chair? you may answer, "because it is used to sit on." Then, when no one in the world, think such a thing, i. e. everyone in the world, will not think it is used to sit on, what do you call such a thing?