By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Being "the better person" = bad?

Immortal on 22 September 2011

I'm beginning to detest cynicism now. This really feels stupid.

Honestly, people are not that simple. If only because of values hammered into you through society, if someone treats you decently, you'll feel - oh, I don't know - bad about treating them badly in response. There's a reason for which calling someone an animal has a negative connotation despite being biologically correct. We consider ourselves smarter than "oh, she gave me a treat - she must really like me doing this". (I dare say that this isn't even entirely true for animals.) When Sally acts so nicely despite Hank's actions, he'll go "why did she do that? I was mean to her". Unless he is an utter moron, he will realize that she was hurt by what he said and is therefore trying to please him now. Since he is in a relationship with her, he'll feel bad about putting her through pain. This is what any relationship of any value in human society is based upon - caring for the other person as well as yourself. If he continues being rotten, he doesn't care for her at all, which means they might as well have a divorce. Therefore, since he does already care for her, he'll see that, by most of society's values, she is being an awfully nice person, feel remorseful for his actions which hurt someone he cared for who is being nice regardless and consequently improve his behaviour.

Now, of course, this is only for mutually caring relationships. If Sally and Hank don't care for each other (again, divorce would be best), then she might as well tell him to go to hell. Unless she's incapable of defending herself for some reason (as in, when it gets serious enough to drag the law into this) and Hank can become worse without any possible reprecussions, this ought to get her a better result. For other forced relationships with coworkers, classmates and others whom you don't have much of a choice but to be with, the OP's logic probably applies. They usually don't care for you and only for their own benefit so you have to be tough with them so you don't get pushed around. (If they're agreable enough people, you can try your luck being decent, but I suppose that's too much to ask.)

I'll admit I have no PhD in human psychology, but several years of unavoidable social interaction have given me enough data to debunk a theory that is obviously flawed and has rarely applied to those I know in real life. Stuff like this is almost entirely like a self-fulfilling prophecy - if you convince everyone that this is true, they'll change their actions to match what they think is what is normal and what should happen, causing everyone to have to be rotten to each other to get through life. The reason you even have to be firm with people you're forced to interact with is because it's becoming less and less of a moral and social obligation to "be nice", as it were, or even appreciate such a quality.



 

“These are my principles; if you don’t like them, I have others.” – Groucho Marx

Around the Network
vlad321 on 22 September 2011
Immortal said:

I'm beginning to detest cynicism now. This really feels stupid.

Honestly, people are not that simple. If only because of values hammered into you through society, if someone treats you decently, you'll feel - oh, I don't know - bad about treating them badly in response. There's a reason for which calling someone an animal has a negative connotation despite being biologically correct. We consider ourselves smarter than "oh, she gave me a treat - she must really like me doing this". (I dare say that this isn't even entirely true for animals.) When Sally acts so nicely despite Hank's actions, he'll go "why did she do that? I was mean to her". Unless he is an utter moron, he will realize that she was hurt by what he said and is therefore trying to please him now. Since he is in a relationship with her, he'll feel bad about putting her through pain. This is what any relationship of any value in human society is based upon - caring for the other person as well as yourself. If he continues being rotten, he doesn't care for her at all, which means they might as well have a divorce. Therefore, since he does already care for her, he'll see that, by most of society's values, she is being an awfully nice person, feel remorseful for his actions which hurt someone he cared for who is being nice regardless and consequently improve his behaviour.

Now, of course, this is only for mutually caring relationships. If Sally and Hank don't care for each other (again, divorce would be best), then she might as well tell him to go to hell. Unless she's incapable of defending herself for some reason (as in, when it gets serious enough to drag the law into this) and Hank can become worse without any possible reprecussions, this ought to get her a better result. For other forced relationships with coworkers, classmates and others whom you don't have much of a choice but to be with, the OP's logic probably applies. They usually don't care for you and only for their own benefit so you have to be tough with them so you don't get pushed around. (If they're agreable enough people, you can try your luck being decent, but I suppose that's too much to ask.)

I'll admit I have no PhD in human psychology, but several years of unavoidable social interaction have given me enough data to debunk a theory that is obviously flawed and has rarely applied to those I know in real life. Stuff like this is almost entirely like a self-fulfilling prophecy - if you convince everyone that this is true, they'll change their actions to match what they think is what is normal and what should happen, causing everyone to have to be rotten to each other to get through life. The reason you even have to be firm with people you're forced to interact with is because it's becoming less and less of a moral and social obligation to "be nice", as it were, or even appreciate such a quality.


Your base assumption for your entire argument (the bolded, if it's not correct me) is faulty, therefore the rest jsut crumbles away. I can't find a single reason why I will HAVE to feel bad about treating you badly if you treat me nicely. Not a single one. I frankly find that opinion highly ignorant. It's like you've never been through school and seen bullies or what not.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

Jay520 on 22 September 2011
vlad321 said:
Immortal said:

I'm beginning to detest cynicism now. This really feels stupid.

Honestly, people are not that simple. If only because of values hammered into you through society, if someone treats you decently, you'll feel - oh, I don't know - bad about treating them badly in response. There's a reason for which calling someone an animal has a negative connotation despite being biologically correct. We consider ourselves smarter than "oh, she gave me a treat - she must really like me doing this". (I dare say that this isn't even entirely true for animals.) When Sally acts so nicely despite Hank's actions, he'll go "why did she do that? I was mean to her". Unless he is an utter moron, he will realize that she was hurt by what he said and is therefore trying to please him now. Since he is in a relationship with her, he'll feel bad about putting her through pain. This is what any relationship of any value in human society is based upon - caring for the other person as well as yourself. If he continues being rotten, he doesn't care for her at all, which means they might as well have a divorce. Therefore, since he does already care for her, he'll see that, by most of society's values, she is being an awfully nice person, feel remorseful for his actions which hurt someone he cared for who is being nice regardless and consequently improve his behaviour.

Now, of course, this is only for mutually caring relationships. If Sally and Hank don't care for each other (again, divorce would be best), then she might as well tell him to go to hell. Unless she's incapable of defending herself for some reason (as in, when it gets serious enough to drag the law into this) and Hank can become worse without any possible reprecussions, this ought to get her a better result. For other forced relationships with coworkers, classmates and others whom you don't have much of a choice but to be with, the OP's logic probably applies. They usually don't care for you and only for their own benefit so you have to be tough with them so you don't get pushed around. (If they're agreable enough people, you can try your luck being decent, but I suppose that's too much to ask.)

I'll admit I have no PhD in human psychology, but several years of unavoidable social interaction have given me enough data to debunk a theory that is obviously flawed and has rarely applied to those I know in real life. Stuff like this is almost entirely like a self-fulfilling prophecy - if you convince everyone that this is true, they'll change their actions to match what they think is what is normal and what should happen, causing everyone to have to be rotten to each other to get through life. The reason you even have to be firm with people you're forced to interact with is because it's becoming less and less of a moral and social obligation to "be nice", as it were, or even appreciate such a quality.


Your base assumption for your entire argument (the bolded, if it's not correct me) is faulty, therefore the rest jsut crumbles away. I can't find a single reason why I will HAVE to feel bad about treating you badly if you treat me nicely. Not a single one. I frankly find that opinion highly ignorant. It's like you've never been through school and seen bullies or what not.



True, the average person has little care for others

Calmador on 22 September 2011
vlad321 said:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/think-well/201109/are-you-teaching-people-treat-you-badly

Are You Teaching People to Treat You Badly?

Don't treat unkindness with kindness
Published on September 22, 2011 by Clifford N. Lazarus, Ph.D. in Think Well

Sally's husband was often abusive. One morning, over breakfast, Hank began yelling at her because she was on the phone instead of keeping him company. Later, after Hank went to work, Sally picked up his shirts from the laundry, ran some other errands for him, and decided to cook his favorite dish for dinner.  Do you think Sally did the right thing?

Sally, alas, believed that if she could only create an ideal loving home atmosphere, her husband's abusiveness would stop. Unfortunately, she was in fact rewarding her husband's negative behavior. In response to his outbursts, Hank found his chores done for him and he was served his favorite dinner. Why would he change his treatment of his wife when she responds so positively?

The events that follow an action will weaken or strengthen the likelihood it will occur again.   In behavioral psychology, this is called the "Law of Effect" and states that behavior varies as a function of its consequences.  Hence, if Sally is nice to Hank when he treats her badly, she is teaching him to continue being abusive. By putting up with Hank's abusive behavior, Sally gives him the message that it's okay to treat her that way. If she showed him instead that she was willing to be especially kind and helpful only when he was considerate and loving, a positive pattern would be more likely to develop.

Similarly, Tommy believed that kindness would overcome unkindness. He sent flowers to his wife whenever she flared up at him, hoping this gesture would put her in a good mood. Instead, it only encouraged her to flare up at him even more.  If Tommy understood the psychological Law of Effect, he would not repay his wife's unkindness with kindness but with a firm, assertive response that clearly expressed his unhappiness.

Keep in mind:

The meek shall inherit the earth because the aggressive people of the world will trample their face into it!

Despite the Biblical decree, if you always turn the other cheek all you'll end up with is a completely sore face.

To encourage positive and discourage offensive behavior:

• Do not reward behaviors in others that you wish to eliminate.

• Follow actor Alan Alda's advice: "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you."

• Learn to speak up assertively.

• Do not reward unkind behavior from others.

• If someone treats you badly, say so - do not smile and pretend it's okay.

Remember:  Think well, act well, feel well, be well!

Copyright by Clifford N. Lazarus, Ph.D.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I feel a disturbance in the force... as if a millions of naive and ignorant people cried out at once.


@vlad321 , just so you know, I'm responding to the article but mostly to the thought of environment being the cause.

Both the abusive husband and the wife are making the same terrible mistake, assuming the husband thinks like Sally and that his bad behavior on her which is making a certian environment to produce certian results. Both wrong, both not smart. The difference is just that she used good behavior.

This article also contradicts itself in admitting that free will exists, saying that oh we can chose to act a different way. It never was about the environment, if it was so about the environment alone... then we wouldn't even be able to think. Everything would be the same and nothing would change just stay the same because theres no will. But people can choose, people can go agianst what the environment might suggest and say no I won't act abusive to my wife. But if your like someone with no will, like a robot and act on your envornment alone, sure this will work for you, for a while and when it doens't work, you'll only have to act more evil, more wrong to keep it working.

You treat others well because that's how we should treat each other. It's not based off our environment, it's just based off doing what's right. Now in order to deal with someone that's abusive, like the article says, the tiny bit of truth in it, you should speak up, not smile, talk, communicate that your not pleased... but that doesn't give you the right or justify you into being abusive yourself. If abusive behavior is bad and you recognize that not acting like that is a value... then you throw that value out of the window right when you start acting bad? Did you even understand that it was bad behavior? Maybe you didn't, quite possibly. The critical problem here is that well that if you act abusive yourself, your no better then the abusive husband. If you act good and well... the good and well behavior contrasts with his cruel ways and he can actually feel ashamed and God willing through that realization, CHANGE. Also your showing him, teaching him kindness. If you act wrongly, basically you get nowhere... yes sure maybe you might stop the problem temporarly but he hasnt changed, his mind set is still... grrrr me be mean and me get what I want, but she's mean and now she gets what she wants.. it's extremely primitive thought-wise and it's like a never ending cycle of revenge, based off selfishness it seems and getting your way by any means. That's EXACTLY how criminals think, the thieves, murderers, rapists, think be mean and get what I want. The Bible says it best, share a few verses.

Matthew 5:43-55

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

These verses speak of a point well. Everyone loves those who love them, even the tax collectors, which is like refering to very sinful people, think murderer. So what better are you if you act the same as even the worst of us. Think about it, if your enemy, started acting like your best friend, loved you and not stop, just kept acting loving to you even if you were still acting like an enemy towards that person.... would you consider him/her your enemy much longer? Only the most dark hearted individuals would refuse that, and hold onto a grudge against someone that has turned into the kindiest person in your life. That's life changing, that's G-d's way.

Nevertheless, evil can be so dark and still after such loving treatment some might still stay evil, and all we can do is pray. After all, G-d did give us free will, and some I'm sure would choose evil even after being surrounded by immense love and kindness. It's not envorinmental, look at Adam and Eve, they were walking around with G-d, that has to the best environoment ever and they still sinned because we have a will and we can choose G-d and his ways or like Adam and Eve unfortunatly did, choose otherwise and eat from the forbidden fruit.

All throughout, bad behavior is always bad and good behavior is always good. Remember it's the bad behavior, abusive husband why were talking about this in the first place. That's the problem! Sin.

Lastly, some beautiful verses to further amplify the point, they are very nice, please read

Romans 12:9-35

 

 14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited.

 17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord. 20 On the contrary:

   “If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
   if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”

 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

That last verse sums it up, overcome evil with GOOD, AMEN

Accept G-d alright, PM any questions, if you lack understanding of this, pray and ask G-d to help you understand. Ask Jesus Christ into your heart and say lord I want you to be my lord and saviour, and then pray a lot, read the Bible, it'll help a lot and look for other christians, PM me I'll give you whatever I can. G-d works inside out... accept him inside. The world (human race) is superficial and tries work outside in... and it's foolish. If I smile, does that mean Iam happy? Of course not, it's not determined by my appearance but by the truth. Inside, the heart and we need G-d to straighten us up there too.

G-d Bless, I don't believe I can say anything else. I am looking for one more verse but couldn't find it. I might post it another time. PM me G-d exists.



All gaming systems, consoles/PC, have thier perks... why fight over preferences? I like Coke and you like Pepsi, that's it, let's not fight over which toy we like best cause that's what they are. Is someone's preference in a toy important or is the relationship between you and your neighbor more important? Answer is obvious, but THE most important thing is your relationship with God almighty. God Bless you in Jesus's name.

I can communicate without talking... I can send a loved one money without actually sending money... and I can commit theft without the product disappearing, the point of theft is the point of theft not one of it's possible symptoms which is the product dissappearing. The thief wants to gain something without paying for it, that's the point of theft, the thief doesn't have to care or anybody else has to care if the product dissappears. The product dissappearing is just a possible symptom of theft. Gifts are sacrfices, in order to give a gift, it has to be a genuine sacrfice/gift, meaning a copy of the game isn't still in your PC. Piracy is theft and/or being a culprit of theft.

vlad321 on 22 September 2011
Calmador said:


@vlad321 , just so you know, I'm responding to the article but mostly to the thought of environment being the cause.

Both the abusive husband and the wife are making the same terrible mistake, assuming the husband thinks like Sally and that his bad behavior on her which is making a certian environment to produce certian results. Both wrong, both not smart. The difference is just that she used good behavior.

This article also contradicts itself in admitting that free will exists, saying that oh we can chose to act a different way. It never was about the environment, if it was so about the environment alone... then we wouldn't even be able to think. Everything would be the same and nothing would change just stay the same because theres no will. But people can choose, people can go agianst what the environment might suggest and say no I won't act abusive to my wife. But if your like someone with no will, like a robot and act on your envornment alone, sure this will work for you, for a while and when it doens't work, you'll only have to act more evil, more wrong to keep it working.

You treat others well because that's how we should treat each other. It's not based off our environment, it's just based off doing what's right. Now in order to deal with someone that's abusive, like the article says, the tiny bit of truth in it, you should speak up, not smile, talk, communicate that your not pleased... but that doesn't give you the right or justify you into being abusive yourself. If abusive behavior is bad and you recognize that not acting like that is a value... then you throw that value out of the window right when you start acting bad? Did you even understand that it was bad behavior? Maybe you didn't, quite possibly. The critical problem here is that well that if you act abusive yourself, your no better then the abusive husband. If you act good and well... the good and well behavior contrasts with his cruel ways and he can actually feel ashamed and God willing through that realization, CHANGE. Also your showing him, teaching him kindness. If you act wrongly, basically you get nowhere... yes sure maybe you might stop the problem temporarly but he hasnt changed, his mind set is still... grrrr me be mean and me get what I want, but she's mean and now she gets what she wants.. it's extremely primitive thought-wise and it's like a never ending cycle of revenge, based off selfishness it seems and getting your way by any means. That's EXACTLY how criminals think, the thieves, murderers, rapists, think be mean and get what I want. The Bible says it best, share a few verses.

Sorry but I had to shorten your response a little for the sake of space.

The article did not mention anything about abuse as a response, so you are arguing with somethign that was not claimed. However even then, taking the example of a bully, if you proceed to smash the bully's face in the pavement, kick him a few times in the ribs while he is down, then once in the face for good measure, I can guarantee with aroun 98% certainty he will not be bullying you again. If it happens to fall in the 2% who continue to do so, repeat grinding his bones into dust again, and next time I guarantee 100% that he won't be bullying again. It just WORKS, that's reality.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

Around the Network
Calmador on 22 September 2011
vlad321 said:

Sorry but I had to shorten your response a little for the sake of space.

The article did not mention anything about abuse as a response, so you are arguing with somethign that was not claimed. However even then, taking the example of a bully, if you proceed to smash the bully's face in the pavement, kick him a few times in the ribs while he is down, then once in the face for good measure, I can guarantee with aroun 98% certainty he will not be bullying you again. If it happens to fall in the 2% who continue to do so, repeat grinding his bones into dust again, and next time I guarantee 100% that he won't be bullying again. It just WORKS, that's reality.

It's understandable

Yeah I know about not using the abuse in the article, but one or more people had that mind set and like you yourself seem to have it aswell thats why I spoke against that.

I was bullied[name calling] once and I didn't fight back, instead I went to the principle. Principle set the 2 bullies straight and they never bothered me again.I didn't lift a finger and I garantee you, the bullies didn't bother me 100% of the time later. That's better then me beating them up. Now if you have to defend yourself physically, if it's even allowed (I'm not sure yet)... but if you have to then atleast take concious in giving the other person the least amount of damage because whats the difference between you and him if you don't take concious in the other person? The bully didn't take concious in you when he was bulling you, and if you act the same then you wouldnt act any better, with anger and vengence, malice.



All gaming systems, consoles/PC, have thier perks... why fight over preferences? I like Coke and you like Pepsi, that's it, let's not fight over which toy we like best cause that's what they are. Is someone's preference in a toy important or is the relationship between you and your neighbor more important? Answer is obvious, but THE most important thing is your relationship with God almighty. God Bless you in Jesus's name.

I can communicate without talking... I can send a loved one money without actually sending money... and I can commit theft without the product disappearing, the point of theft is the point of theft not one of it's possible symptoms which is the product dissappearing. The thief wants to gain something without paying for it, that's the point of theft, the thief doesn't have to care or anybody else has to care if the product dissappears. The product dissappearing is just a possible symptom of theft. Gifts are sacrfices, in order to give a gift, it has to be a genuine sacrfice/gift, meaning a copy of the game isn't still in your PC. Piracy is theft and/or being a culprit of theft.

vlad321 on 22 September 2011
Calmador said:
vlad321 said:

Sorry but I had to shorten your response a little for the sake of space.

The article did not mention anything about abuse as a response, so you are arguing with somethign that was not claimed. However even then, taking the example of a bully, if you proceed to smash the bully's face in the pavement, kick him a few times in the ribs while he is down, then once in the face for good measure, I can guarantee with aroun 98% certainty he will not be bullying you again. If it happens to fall in the 2% who continue to do so, repeat grinding his bones into dust again, and next time I guarantee 100% that he won't be bullying again. It just WORKS, that's reality.

It's understandable

Yeah I know about not using the abuse in the article, but one or more people had that mind set and like you yourself seem to have it aswell thats why I spoke against that.

I was bullied[name calling] once and I didn't fight back, instead I went to the principle. Principle set the 2 bullies straight and they never bothered me again.I didn't lift a finger and I garantee you, the bullies didn't bother me 100% of the time later. That's better then me beating them up. Now if you have to defend yourself physically, if it's even allowed (I'm not sure yet)... but if you have to then atleast take concious in giving the other person the least amount of damage because whats the difference between you and him if you don't take concious in the other person? The bully didn't take concious in you when he was bulling you, and if you act the same then you wouldnt act any better, with anger and vengence, malice.


You don't see the difference between an action and a reaction? It is as plain as black and white......



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

Calmador on 22 September 2011
vlad321 said:
Calmador said:

It's understandable

Yeah I know about not using the abuse in the article, but one or more people had that mind set and like you yourself seem to have it aswell thats why I spoke against that.

I was bullied[name calling] once and I didn't fight back, instead I went to the principle. Principle set the 2 bullies straight and they never bothered me again.I didn't lift a finger and I garantee you, the bullies didn't bother me 100% of the time later. That's better then me beating them up. Now if you have to defend yourself physically, if it's even allowed (I'm not sure yet)... but if you have to then atleast take concious in giving the other person the least amount of damage because whats the difference between you and him if you don't take concious in the other person? The bully didn't take concious in you when he was bulling you, and if you act the same then you wouldnt act any better, with anger and vengence, malice.


You don't see the difference between an action and a reaction? It is as plain as black and white......

I know the difference between both words but what does that have to do with anything?



All gaming systems, consoles/PC, have thier perks... why fight over preferences? I like Coke and you like Pepsi, that's it, let's not fight over which toy we like best cause that's what they are. Is someone's preference in a toy important or is the relationship between you and your neighbor more important? Answer is obvious, but THE most important thing is your relationship with God almighty. God Bless you in Jesus's name.

I can communicate without talking... I can send a loved one money without actually sending money... and I can commit theft without the product disappearing, the point of theft is the point of theft not one of it's possible symptoms which is the product dissappearing. The thief wants to gain something without paying for it, that's the point of theft, the thief doesn't have to care or anybody else has to care if the product dissappears. The product dissappearing is just a possible symptom of theft. Gifts are sacrfices, in order to give a gift, it has to be a genuine sacrfice/gift, meaning a copy of the game isn't still in your PC. Piracy is theft and/or being a culprit of theft.

vlad321 on 22 September 2011
Calmador said:
vlad321 said:
Calmador said:

It's understandable

Yeah I know about not using the abuse in the article, but one or more people had that mind set and like you yourself seem to have it aswell thats why I spoke against that.

I was bullied[name calling] once and I didn't fight back, instead I went to the principle. Principle set the 2 bullies straight and they never bothered me again.I didn't lift a finger and I garantee you, the bullies didn't bother me 100% of the time later. That's better then me beating them up. Now if you have to defend yourself physically, if it's even allowed (I'm not sure yet)... but if you have to then atleast take concious in giving the other person the least amount of damage because whats the difference between you and him if you don't take concious in the other person? The bully didn't take concious in you when he was bulling you, and if you act the same then you wouldnt act any better, with anger and vengence, malice.


You don't see the difference between an action and a reaction? It is as plain as black and white......

I know the difference between both words but what does that have to do with anything?


Because by putting two and two together you get the fact that the bully does an action. Beating the shit out of him as a reaction. Two different things, yet you still said, and I quote, " whats the difference between you and him." Sounds like you either don't know the difference between an action/reaction, realize there IS a difference between a respoding with force, or you suffer from some form of cognitive dissonance.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

Calmador on 22 September 2011
vlad321 said:
Calmador said:

I know the difference between both words but what does that have to do with anything?


Because by putting two and two together you get the fact that the bully does an action. Beating the shit out of him as a reaction. Two different things, yet you still said, and I quote, " whats the difference between you and him." Sounds like you either don't know the difference between an action/reaction, realize there IS a difference between a respoding with force, or you suffer from some form of cognitive dissonance.

 I'm a bit buffled, about you not seeing what I said. 

The "soul" of the words define them not the words action and reaction. There will always be a difference but that difference that you took note of, according to the topic at hand, is absolutely irrelvant. It's like we were talking about cars and I told you both had the same engines and you said thier colors make em different. Yes the colors do... but were talking about engines and if the engines are the same then that's what makes the engines the same.

Example: a police man see's you getting beaten up in the streets, pities you and goes after the criminal, beats him up, restricting himself to certian amount of force[also pitying him] and captures him. While before that happened, you were trying to bully [just pushed him once] the criminal and the criminal reacted [note I used reacted as in reaction] and was beating you into a blooding pulp, with no pity. Do you understand now? The differences?

G-d Bless

FYI- I'm not insulting you in anyway right now ok? and please don't insult me here aswell.



All gaming systems, consoles/PC, have thier perks... why fight over preferences? I like Coke and you like Pepsi, that's it, let's not fight over which toy we like best cause that's what they are. Is someone's preference in a toy important or is the relationship between you and your neighbor more important? Answer is obvious, but THE most important thing is your relationship with God almighty. God Bless you in Jesus's name.

I can communicate without talking... I can send a loved one money without actually sending money... and I can commit theft without the product disappearing, the point of theft is the point of theft not one of it's possible symptoms which is the product dissappearing. The thief wants to gain something without paying for it, that's the point of theft, the thief doesn't have to care or anybody else has to care if the product dissappears. The product dissappearing is just a possible symptom of theft. Gifts are sacrfices, in order to give a gift, it has to be a genuine sacrfice/gift, meaning a copy of the game isn't still in your PC. Piracy is theft and/or being a culprit of theft.