The meek or the ruthless: who prevails in the end?

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

It was my understanding that you told tuna that you had first hand experience of loss of integrity and therefore, knowledge of what it was and what led up to it. But you denied that it was following the example of the criminal. I'll take your word for that.

But when tuna asked for what your first hand experience WAS, you appeared to dodge the question by referring back to your denial of the criminal example

If that is your understanding, then what you need to do at this point is show me where I said that I had first hand experience with the loss of integrity and knowledge of what it was that led up to it. You, too, are attributing something to me that I did not say. Tuna even admitted to making the mistake of attributing that to me when I said no such thing. If you refuse to believe that, I suggest--again--that you review this thread . . . thoroughly!

1 Reply

@Glennn,

As the warden said to cool hand Luke, 'what we have here is a failure to communicate.'

When you tell someone that their idea of the path to loss of integrity is wrong and that you definitevly do know what the path is, I was assuming you had first hand knowledge of the matter. OK, I'm now convinced that you don't.

Im pretty sure you don't realize there are many paths to losing integrity, not just following the criminal.

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

True, Leadfoot.

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

As the warden said to cool hand Luke, 'what we have here is a failure to communicate.'

Boy ain't that the truth.

Now you're implying that I have said that someone's idea of the path to the loss of integrity is wrong. I said no such thing. I would ask you to show me where I said such a thing, but I'm guessing that there is as much a chance of that happening as there is of you showing me where I said that I have followed the example of the criminal, and that I had first hand experience with the loss of integrity and knowledge of what it was that led up to it.

This is not so much a case of a failure to communicate as it is a case of your inability to comprehend.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

I understand Glennn.

You are sinless.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

You said: It was my understanding that you told tuna that you had first hand experience of loss of integrity and therefore, knowledge of what it was and what led up to it.

I told you that your understanding is flawed. In an effort to show you that your understanding is flawed, I asked you to show me where I have told Tuna that I had firsthand experience of losing my integrity through following the example of the criminal, plus the knowledge of what it was that led up to it. You have failed to produce any such thing. The reason you are failing to produce any such thing is because it doesn't exist. You are having difficulty accepting that.

I have also pointed out to you that Tuna has admitted to mistakenly attributing something to me which I did not say. What he was mistaken about was the idea that I had said that I had followed the example of the criminal. Why are you still hanging onto his error? This is where you should try to show me where I have told Tuna that I had firsthand experience of loss of integrity and therefore the knowledge of what led up to it. Then after failing to produce such a thing--because it doesn't exist--you need to adjust your thinking in such a way that you will stop asking the same thing over and over again.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Quote:

You said: It was my understanding that you told tuna that you had first hand experience of loss of integrity and therefore, knowledge of what it was and what led up to it.

I told you that your understanding is flawed.

Yeah, I got that and moved on. Can you?

By rejecting all other paths to loss of integrity except the 'criminal', it implied to me that you must know of it first hand. If that's not the case, I'm asking where you got your understanding of it. Book, some expert, divine revelation, other? Really, the question is pretty simple.

If you don't want to answer, that's OK.

FWIW, to me, loss of integrity is synonymous with sin and both are born out of denial of reality. I'm not unwilling to admit that I have at times done that.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

By rejecting all other paths to loss of integrity except the 'criminal', it implied to me that you must know of it first hand.

But . . . I did not reject all other paths to loss of integrity. Where have I said such a thing?

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Quote:

But . . . I did not reject all other paths to loss of integrity. Where have I said such a thing?

Well, you categorically rejected Tuna's suggestion and wouldn't suggest what other paths there might be (other than 'criminal') when I asked.

So, again, since you don't have first hand experience, where did you learn about the paths and what other possible ones are there in your understanding.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

Well, you categorically rejected Tuna's suggestion

Show me where I did this.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

It was spread over several posts but this is the core of it:

Quote:

Glennn said:
Life is nothing but a competition to be the criminal rather than the victim.

That's another way of saying that following the example of the criminal is the solution to being a victim? Like, if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em.

But then you've allowed the criminal whose example you have chosen to follow to also steal your integrity.

Tuna replied:

Quote:

Loss of integrity doesn't happen like that.

It creeps up on you like a grey mist. You sit down at the end of a wild and reckless day and then it hits you. Upon refection, you realize that you knew you were treading into the mist, but you told yourself that you're a good person, so there's nothing to worry about.

You realize that it was that brass ring that got you. It was that voice saying "This is your only chance. Stiffen your upper lip. Do what you have to do."

In that moment you have a choice. You can say it's okay if you go to your grave and never get what you really wanted. The pay off will be that you close your eyes for the last time and know that you didn't make the world a little bit more shitty. Or... you can become numb and blind and blunder forward into the mist perhaps to one day find yourself offering your kingdom for a horse.

You (Glennn) then replied

Quote:

"Yes it does ".

That sounds like a categorical rejection of Tuna's view and a reinforcement of your 'criminal' view to me.

So I still want to know how you know that.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

I said: But then you've allowed the criminal whose example you've chosen to follow to also steal your integrity.
____________________________________
No categorical rejection of Tuna's suggestion there.
____________________________________

Then Tuna responds to what I said with: Loss of integrity doesn't happen like that.

Then I replied: Yes it does.
____________________________________
Again, no categorical rejection of Tuna's suggestion. In fact, she rejected my suggestion of what causes a loss of integrity.
____________________________________

So, what we have here is you interpreting my example of what constitutes a loss of integrity as a rejection of all others examples. You are in error.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

And you still haven't answered my question.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

And you still haven't answered my question.

I said: But then you've allowed the criminal whose example you've chosen to follow to also steal your integrity.

Then Tuna said: Loss of integrity doesn't happen like that.

Then I replied: Yes it does.

You then interpreted "Yes it does" as a categorical rejection of Tuna's view. How on earth did you pull that from "Yes it does"?
________________________________________

Perhaps if you admit that my saying "Yes it does" in no way was a categorical rejection of Tuna's view, I might answer your question. But until you do, I have no reason to believe that you won't also misinterpret what I might say about that.

1 Reply

Send them to the Cornfield Anthony!

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Sorry, but I burned the cornfield last night, and I had Anthony for breakfast this morning.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Quote:

Perhaps if you admit that my saying "Yes it does" in no way was a categorical rejection of Tuna's view, I might answer your question. But until you do, I have no reason to believe that you won't also misinterpret what I might say about that.

If I assumed or inferred more than what you were saying you have my sincere apology.

Now for what really interested me:
How do you know about what leads to loss of integrity without having the direct experience? Or did I get that wrong too?

0 Replies

@Glennn,

I don't think you watched that episode of Twilight Zone. No one eats Anthony for any meal at any time.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

No one eats Anthony for any meal at any time.

Oh really? Have you seen Anthony around since yesterday morning after I had breakfast? Didn't think so.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Jeesh! At least give the guy 24 hours.

1 Reply

The meek or the ruthless: who prevails in the end?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know