smac97 Posted January 12, 2022 Posted January 12, 2022 33 minutes ago, Chum said: Well, okay I guess. Not sure why you want to introduce all these things into the thread. It's not a good container for it. I think these things naturally came to mind in the course of this thread. I was just presenting my views on them.
Chum Posted January 12, 2022 Author Posted January 12, 2022 2 minutes ago, smac97 said: I think these things naturally came to mind in the course of this thread. I was just presenting my views on them. I get it. Unwarranted distractions and all that. Everyone gets older huh? One day my kids will deserve great sympathy.
Scott Lloyd Posted January 12, 2022 Posted January 12, 2022 (edited) On 1/11/2022 at 10:54 AM, Fether said: Can you please point to where we suggest we “assume personal or institutional blame or culpability”? From Buckeye’s post above: “I disagree with those who say we should not try to remedy mistakes our predecessors made or even to apologize for them. If we truly love our predecessors we will join in their repentance by proxy where possible.” Of course it’s possible your use of the pronoun “we” does not include Buckeye. Or, to put it another way, you don’t “own” Buckeye’s comments. 😉 Added later: I noticed just now that Chum himself, the OP, gave an upvote with a thank you icon to Buckeye’s post. So it’s reasonable to conclude that's an indication that Chum, at least, signs onto — or “owns” — the collective-culpability/institutional-guilt mentality espoused by Buckeye in his post. Maybe you don’t, but you guys need to get your stories straight if you’re going to use the “we” pronoun. Edited January 12, 2022 by Scott Lloyd
smac97 Posted January 12, 2022 Posted January 12, 2022 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Chum said: I get it. Unwarranted distractions and all that. It's not unwarranted. Construing the topic as pertaining to notion of collective culpability/guilt was a reasonable continuation of the topic at hand. Buckeye seems to have taken your comments the same way I did ("If we truly love our predecessors we will join in their repentance by proxy where possible."). So did Scott. 17 minutes ago, Chum said: Everyone gets older huh? One day my kids will deserve great sympathy. Not sure what you are saying here. Thanks, -Smac Edited January 12, 2022 by smac97 1
Chum Posted January 12, 2022 Author Posted January 12, 2022 32 minutes ago, smac97 said: Construing the topic as pertaining to notion of collective culpability/guilt was a reasonable continuation of the topic at hand. Buckeye seems to have taken your comments the same way I did ("If we truly love our predecessors we will join in their repentance by proxy where possible."). So did Scott. Hmm. Predecessors aren't much more than a background character in my little summer-stock. As I write this, I'm thinking an unfortunate event might serve as well. The intended focus of this personal principle thingy is on those who've experienced a less than ideal outcome. The point of the OP is to highlight a mindset - one that helps me better accept their needs. My assumptions about fairness were holding that back but I found I could safely toss those assumptions aside. sitebar: One of my takeaways is that I was mistaken to assume fairness has immutable, intrinsically positive value. Sometimes it just gets in the way of beneficial outcomes. As with truth, I have downgraded fairness a bit. 2
bluebell Posted January 12, 2022 Posted January 12, 2022 10 hours ago, Chum said: sitebar: One of my takeaways is that I was mistaken to assume fairness has immutable, intrinsically positive value. Sometimes it just gets in the way of beneficial outcomes. As with truth, I have downgraded fairness a bit. The Atonement is a perfect example of this principle. 1
Bob Crockett Posted January 12, 2022 Posted January 12, 2022 (edited) On 1/10/2022 at 11:41 AM, bsjkki said: I think that leadership books written by ex-Seals are moronic and overly simplistic. I've read a couple and they are the same. In particular I've read Jocko's book. He is a moron. He has little understanding of the complexities of human psychology. Edited January 12, 2022 by Bob Crockett
smac97 Posted January 12, 2022 Posted January 12, 2022 38 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said: I think that leadership books written by ex-Seals are moronic and overly simplistic. I've read a couple and they are the same. I think this philosophy also has limited application in some circumstances. Someone truly intending on adopting an "extreme ownership" mentality could well turn into a tyrant. Imagine a father who takes an "extreme ownership" posture as to whether his son serves a mission. Kinda easy to take it ("extreme ownership") as justification to disregard the decisions and agency of others, and/or to exceed the bounds of one's stewardship. Thanks, -Smac 3
mfbukowski Posted January 12, 2022 Posted January 12, 2022 40 minutes ago, smac97 said: I think this philosophy also has limited application in some circumstances. Someone truly intending on adopting an "extreme ownership" mentality could well turn into a tyrant. Imagine a father who takes an "extreme ownership" posture as to whether his son serves a mission. Kinda easy to take it ("extreme ownership") as justification to disregard the decisions and agency of others, and/or to exceed the bounds of one's stewardship. Thanks, -Smac Yep, imo this would be pathologically extreme OCD, definitely a mental disorder 1
Scott Lloyd Posted January 12, 2022 Posted January 12, 2022 15 hours ago, Chum said: I get it. Unwarranted distractions and all that. Everyone gets older huh? One day my kids will deserve great sympathy. 15 hours ago, smac97 said: Not sure what you are saying here. Thanks, -Smac Me neither. It seems a weird response.
Recommended Posts