(no title)
duedl0r | 7 years ago
If you want to learn from bad people: Do it, but use it for good. For example in identifying people who are bad, or want to take advantage of you/others. But certainly not to get a balance.
And btw, I always hope, people with questionable opinions get screwed by someone with the same questionable view. Let's hope you'll learn your lesson.
sametmax|7 years ago
Now, building strengh, characters, and participating to alternatives to the status quo are better long term strategies.
But on the short term, always playing by the rules is a serious disadvantages in some environments.
duedl0r|7 years ago
Your argument started with "it's easier to get laid, if I'm a jerk". And now your argument is "it pays to be a jerk in harsh environments". First of all, I hope women aren't included in your harsh environment. Second, you're right. Absolute commitments without exceptions is rarely good advice. There are always exceptions. My criticism is about finding a balance of being a jerk. There is no balance to be attained. There might be exceptions, but not something to balance for.
I'm aware that I feel very strongly about it. That's why I couldn't hold myself back from writing a comment. For me this is very important, because I get the feeling, that humanity is drifting towards dishonesty. It's even expected to be lied at. For example, my co-workers lie to our customers if we missed something or implemented a bug in our software. It's not an option anymore to say to them straight, that we made an error! How stupid is that? The customers wants to be lied at! On the other hand, if they did something they're not supposed to do with our software, they lie about what they really did. This gets me so angry... Sorry, I'm going to stop now.. :)
minkzilla|7 years ago
ponderatul|7 years ago
Nomentatus|7 years ago
duedl0r|7 years ago
First, your quote is not from a post I answered.
Second, it's interesting to have a link to Jung's material. But stating "something is true, since Jung discusses it at length" is just a very bad argument. Why? Because duedl0r said so.
Third, actually, I share your opinion about the quote and all....but the way you wrote your post is not ok for me
ponderatul|7 years ago
I'd say it's a layered thing. You start with the right core, but you layer some of these bad characteristics on top. Depending on your environment, you will have to deal with different kinds of people.
Your example is exactly what I mean by balance. But there are more. But itt difficult to showcase my point when your response just leaks out moral superiority, as if you know the backstory to these opinions.
Looking at the relationship between Trump and the media vs any "good guy" and the media. He can, would and did say everything he wanted, and no one batted an eye, it moved no one. Fundamentally a lot of people already thought he was bad, or that he says shit.
But take your "good guy" Joe. That if his image was built on pure goodness, one slip, one mistake and the press would be all over him.
What I'm trying to see is that the arsenal of weapons ( physical, mental) at a bad person's disposal is larger than a purely good person's.
And that is maintained with scale. I'm looking at the weapons bad politicians have and use, vs those that the purely good ones have at their disposal. Especially when the former have power.
There's more to this. But it's hard to have a discussion with someone, who can't see that some of the things bad people do, have a place in this world, and can be employed for a better purpose.