Quote Discussion, Current quote: “Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.” page 29

815 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

In the End….: can mean several things. Since it is capitalized, it probably means DEATH.

Unless you can prove that MLK himself capitalized the word, I think it’s highly unwise to assume that it’s supposed to be that way.

I don’t believe “highly unwise” is necessary measure to be applied…esp. to someones quotes made by one so distinguished.

BUT, ya do bring up the need for “cautionary” blind acceptance of what ya hear & read & even see. Good point.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

I don’t believe “highly unwise” is necessary measure to be applied…esp. to someones quotes made by one so distinguished.

I don’t apply “highly unwise” to the quote, I apply it to people interpreting it and assuming capitalization. There’s a big difference.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:

It has nothing to do with death. It has to do with that when we are being attacked, the attack itself never hurt us as much as a friend who stands by doing nothing to stop the attack.

That’s a bit close to home, and I agree totally. I found myself in the middle of a legal shitstorm last year (nothing criminal, it was about property deeds). People I regarded as no more than acquaintances rallied round to help, but when a man I thought of as an old and trusted friend joined the attack, that cut to the quick. For me this is all about the wounds caused by betrayal.

 
Flag Post

I should remember the silence of my enemies… If I outlive them. but cling dearly to the words of friends when dying…

 
Flag Post

It has to do with how our enemies could treat us and how ‘friends’ may remain silent just to save themselves.

Back in racist America (well, when it was even more so) and a white person would harshly treat a black person and his black friends would do nothing or if a black kid had a white friend who did nothing, that’s what’s notable. Black people getting whipped/whatever? Back then it was typical. But not doing anything is what’s wrong. Letting your friend be killed because of your own fear is what’s wrong.

If I were a black slave in 19th century America, I’d organise a riot in my farm. Black people would outnumber whites, so it wouldn’t be that hard, and at worst dying by gunshot would be better than a lifetime as a slave. Not to mention, if successful, there’d be an element of freedom. Few slaves probably thought that, but couldn’t act upon it as a result of their coward ‘friends’ who’d choose silence.

This is essentially the same for a dictatorship such as in Nazi Germany. E.g., “oh, yeah, my neighbour’s a Jew but I’m a Christian”, with no sense of remorse for the neighbour, for the friend. The silence and failure to act upon something is what is pernicious to society.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Dartval:

A day late, but here’s an MLK quote for MLK day.

“In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

~Martin Luther King, Jr.

i really like it. i think it might be true, too. yes, i’m pretty sure he’s talking about “the end” as either death bed, or the end of uhm…circumstances, like after a revolution is over or something like that maybe. but mostly i think deathbed.

what he’s saying is that what enemies say to us is not what hurts, but what friends don’t say. it’s basically two things that can be said seperately: our friends can hurt us more deeply than our enemies; and it’s not what’s said, but what has remained unsaid that disturbs us more or something like that.

imagine an “enemy”, maybe just someone you mutually dislike, insults you, and your friend actually doesn’t disagree with what was said…which would hurt you more?

i like it.

 
Flag Post

The expressions of your enemies are not memorable because they assent or agree to “holographic” expectations. What I mean is that you expect your enemy to rebuke and mock you in some way or another, with one word or a drawn-out diatribe.

The actions of your friend may be well-intended and beneficial, but the absence of their facilitation is always one of jarring irreconcilability with expectations.

After all, what kind of ally willfully pursues his foe only to not subdue the enemy, but flee from him? Your ally is expected to stand by you with fingers at the trigger, available to deliver you from harm with only the minor scratch. Silence is circumstantially incongruous with expected reality, although practice is not always of principle.

The nonconformity of practice to principle is what distinguishes the character of silence in friend in relation to lambaste by enemy.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by beauval:
Originally posted by NaturalReject:

It has nothing to do with death. It has to do with that when we are being attacked, the attack itself never hurt us as much as a friend who stands by doing nothing to stop the attack.

That’s a bit close to home, and I agree totally. I found myself in the middle of a legal shitstorm last year (nothing criminal, it was about property deeds). People I regarded as no more than acquaintances rallied round to help, but when a man I thought of as an old and trusted friend joined the attack, that cut to the quick. For me this is all about the wounds caused by betrayal.

Aha, beauval…I should have seen this application to the quote myself.
Perhaps it is a result of being much too close to it and also being much too “accepting” of it as simply a part of life.

I earlier spoke of the quote being applied as referring to CRITICISM
Yeah, the first definition is the one we are most familiar w/….that being the more “negative” connotation of it.
BUT, the second one is one that I try to keep in mind when doing something I hope is viewed as being CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. I long ago came across the concept of the art of complaining

I think what we’re talking about here isn’t really a “flip-side” of good criticism.
But, it’s more of a “sister” to it.
The “silent” sister.
The one who will neither support nor “question” our positions.
A true friend does BOTH….and, such is one of the key factors that determines who is a friend. Of course…HOW they do it can make BOTH sides of that coin much easier to accept.

Anyway, the situation YOU described did the two things that can ever so quickly diminish a friendship….right on down to the death of it.
The first part is where the quote talked about the friend’s silence.
For a “friend” to fail to show (AT LEAST some level) commaraderie//support when ya’re being beset upon by negative forces….would, at best, be seen as being what is referred to as a “fair-weather” friend.

BUT, what is highly likely to be a death-of-friendship move is when a friend OPENLY joins in on the attack upon you. To talk to you, to be “critical”—be your “muse”—would be done in private w/ you….NOT, openly, esp. in front of said “enemy”.

I’m unable to find a good source to describe what I mean by “muse”. So, I’ll just “wing it” by saying: a muse can be that person (often retained by AND GIVEN a form of “immunity” from a powerful man/woman) who is to “whisper-in-the-ear” that part of the picture that the person either overlooks inadvertently OR does so intentionally.

In today’s parlance, this would be the opposite of “yes-men” for a powerful CEO of a large company. A real friend will give their honest opinion//evaluation of our position (as if their thoughts weren’t already known by us…duh,,,so, maybe just a “reminder”?) on a matter being contested by outside forces.

Yes, such “sharing” of sentiments by a loved one can have deleterious effects upon the relationship.
HOWEVER, such positions by the two of you already exist.
To “tiptoe” around them is to deny the reality of the friendship….the potential depth or “cooling” of it.

My buddy Gibran explains it quite nicely.

 
Flag Post

New quote:

“He who conquers others is strong; He who conquers himself is mighty.”

~Lao Tzu

 
Flag Post

For an opening salvo…
I’m gonna go w/ brevity: It’s always easy to be strongly CRITICAL of others,,,,
even to a high degree of accuracy.

HOWEVER, for most of us…
being just as critical of OURSELVES is pretty damned difficult.

AND, we should be able to be even MORE ACCURATE about it,,,
who else knows us better than us?
Who else stands to profit—TRUE PROFIT—most from our being at one w/ our self?

 
Flag Post

Lao Tzu was a brilliant man. this quote is as it says “He who conquers others is strong; He who conquers himself is mighty.” Think, really… When you are very angry at someone, and have a strong urge to beat them down. By doing so, you would be conquering “others.” If you don’t, you’ll notice that is it VERY difficult. This is conquering “himself.” Lao Tzu, in this quote, is speaking in terms of a strong body versus a strong mind.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by zomgsilverore:

Lao Tzu was a brilliant man. this quote is as it says “He who conquers others is strong; He who conquers himself is mighty.” Think, really… When you are very angry at someone, and have a strong urge to beat them down. By doing so, you would be conquering “others.” If you don’t, you’ll notice that is it VERY difficult. This is conquering “himself.” Lao Tzu, in this quote, is speaking in terms of a strong body versus a strong mind.

Ah, you beat me to it. I believe humility also plays a role in this. Pride usually is what leads people to one-up others. It is easy to make others submit defeat to you. But it is tremendously more difficult to get yourself to admit defeat—not to anyone else—but to yourself. It takes a lot of guts to change. As they say, “the first step to solving a problem is admitting there is a problem.”

 
Flag Post

With physical strength one can overpower his enemies. But to conquer fears, anxieties, and other personal problems is mighty. If I have the strength and power to kill someone when I am mad, but use all of my internal resistance and turn my back, even though I am strong, I am powerful / mighty on the inside.

External strength vs internal strength.

 
Flag Post

this means that who can get gf is maybe strong, but who can get himself so cool that other people would like him is mighty.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Rolby:

this means that who can get gf is maybe strong, but who can get himself so cool that other people would like him is mighty.

Rolby, Serious Discussion is not for you. Stick to OT.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Dartval:
Originally posted by Rolby:

this means that who can get gf is maybe strong, but who can get himself so cool that other people would like him is mighty.

Rolby, Serious Discussion is not for you. Stick to OT.

ur a little full of yourself.

everyone should participate. all views are welcome.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Galdos:
Originally posted by Dartval:
Originally posted by Rolby:

this means that who can get gf is maybe strong, but who can get himself so cool that other people would like him is mighty.

Rolby, Serious Discussion is not for you. Stick to OT.

ur a little full of yourself.

everyone should participate. all views are welcome.

Dartval started this thread,,,,
which means to me that it is (somewhat?) HIS.
Ergo, yeah….I’d say he CAN BE “a little full of himself”….eh?

Besides,
while "all views are “welcome”…
it certainly DOES NOT mean they are “equally worthy” of being here.
OR, at the very least….to not be subjected to criticism.
Kinda obvious….ain’t it?

 
Flag Post

New quote:

“This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel.”

~Horace Walpole

 
Flag Post

Those who truly posses the ability to think deeply are able to grasp the concept of the “Clash/Balance of Life Forces” and thereby find the entertainment? afforded via this duality.

Those who allow emotion to rule their lives shall always focus far too greatly upon the tragedy & how it is the price so dearly paid for joy.

What The Prophet said

What a PhD said about the above

 
Flag Post

Perhaps…

Those who understand or are smart enough to not involve themselves in such things as war, fights, stock, economy crashes, etc. sit back and laugh at those who are affected by the events.

 
Flag Post

Plato, Calvin, Socrates, and all other great philosophers will humbly disagree with OP on this one.

 
Flag Post

you can laugh at idiots, and only idiots get all emotional. this is my definition of course :3 (though not the real one)

 
Flag Post

New quote

“True friends stab you in the front.”

~Oscar Wilde

 
Flag Post

This one is pretty “basic”.
Even “true friends” will, (at least once?), have to impugn ya in some fashion or another.
Usually NOT “desirously” intentionally,,,
more of a “no-real-other-choice”,,,
or a “this-is-for-your-own-good” kind of thing.

BUT, they will be “up front” & honest about it.

 
Flag Post

This quote is stupid.
Either stabbing in the back or front, you will still die, or will get wounded badly.