My older brother and I, whenever we are on the phone, inevitably find ourselves engaging in a purely rhetorical debate; his role is to spout Panglossian proverbs and adages, and mine is to let forth an acid-filled counterargument. Then we laugh and resume normal conversation.
In playing the voice of harsh outrage in these jesting discussions, though, I often find that I'm not faking my scathing rejection of his clichés. It may not be the most traditional sibling bonding, but it's helped save my critical thinking muscles from atrophy. Some examples:
What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger.
My retort: "What doesn't kill you can leave you a hollow shell of your former self, completely unequipped for the challenges ahead!"
I really think I had a point. This is probably my least favorite cliché; it's nothing more than a cop-out, an attempt to pretend that affliction is a blessing. It isn't. That's why we call it affliction.
Life isn't fair.
My retort: "Of course not. The overall nature of the universe, however, does not excuse your conduct."
Pessimism never won any battle.
My retort: "No, but it probably prevented some really stupid ones that didn't need to be fought."
Further to this rejection of existing trite phrases, I've started creating my own variations: "ponies and rainbows" (a complimentary closing indicating politely suppressed ire), and the self-explanatory "encrapulation" and "thought-resistant".
We may never escape greeting cards. But we don't have to talk like them.
There is no doubt that your older brother has a formidable intellectual foe in his younger sister!
"Thought-resistant"! LMAFO!