The Devil's Details

  • Thread starter Thread starter LethalMouse
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LethalMouse

Guest
Years long past, the avg decent human never saw the inside of a court room, now between the 50% divorce rate and who knows how many non marriage divorce custody battles and the love of suing people we have a generation of lawyers which bleeds into everything.

This bleeds into friendships and relationships and into even the forums here as examples are nitpicked irrationally.

An example lol:

Human tells a man to climb Mount Everest and the man goes and walks up a mountain trail 20 feet and goes home.

The human asks the man “why did you break my rule?” The man says “You said climb Mount Everest, which I did, you never said how much :P”

The human “well you got me on technicality you win today.”

GOD tells a man to climb Mount Everest and the human walks the 20 ft and goes home.

God says “why have you disobeyed me?”

The man says “You said climb Mount Everest, which I did, you never said how much :P”

God sends the man to Hell for eternity…

Does no one see the issue with these technicalities?
 
What you are describing is the heart of pretty much every cautionary tale regarding the fae or faeries. The Christianization of Europe wove traditional myths into moralistic tales that remained entertaining but also contained a deeper truth. Before faeries became admired precisely FOR their loose morals, they were basically demons… Lightweight or mischievous demons, but still a warning against playing with dangerous things simply because they’re wrapped in pretty packages.

The lesson? Always define the terms. Don’t make deals with a cunning and superior intelligence. Faeries were the original trickster lawyers. And they carried the same warning as making deals with the devil: Don’t think you’re smarter. Always read the fine print. And if they didn’t think they’d come out ahead, they wouldn’t make the deal in the first place.

Not to mention that they’re usually distracting you with scantily clad, perfected humanoid bodies. :eek:

Caveat emptor!
 
As far as my analysis is concerned, sin is a repeated deliberate and consciential disobedience to the mosaic and eternal command.
 
kdbueno said:
As far as my analysis is concerned, sin is a repeated deliberate and consciential disobedience to the mosaic and eternal command.
Click to expand...
I was referring to its use in relationships of the interpersonal kind as well as sin/law…

But to make it more interpersonal and not so sinful I would say like this:

Friend, significant other, family member agrees to pick you up from work tomorrow:
(they know full well you get off at 3:30pm)

You call them from home at 5pm after paying for a cab and they say they were on the way and would have been there at 5:30… Then they defend themselves and literally are convinced they are not morally wrong because “you said pick you up from work, you never specified as time for me to be there so I could technically come anytime before midnight”

This instance in a courtroom setting the person is correct and if they were accused of a crime of this like or being sued they would win as they ARE TECHNICALLY 100% correct by details…

However, you probably aren’t their friend anymore and clearly this person is not a good person. Because legalese aside, anyone who would do this is morally wrong even if not involved in a case of pure sinful behavior…

I feel like this is what our society has come to, and many posters on here use this same kind of logic to “win” arguments. But I say that you are still wrong even if you go to court and prove that there was never technically a time stated…
 
SilverShadow22 said:
What you are describing is the heart of pretty much every cautionary tale regarding the fae or faeries. The Christianization of Europe wove traditional myths into moralistic tales that remained entertaining but also contained a deeper truth. Before faeries became admired precisely FOR their loose morals, they were basically demons… Lightweight or mischievous demons, but still a warning against playing with dangerous things simply because they’re wrapped in pretty packages.

The lesson?** Always define the terms. **Don’t make deals with a cunning and superior intelligence. Faeries were the original trickster lawyers. And they carried the same warning as making deals with the devil: Don’t think you’re smarter. Always read the fine print. And if they didn’t think they’d come out ahead, they wouldn’t make the deal in the first place.

Not to mention that they’re usually distracting you with scantily clad, perfected humanoid bodies. :eek:

Caveat emptor!
Click to expand...
Generally post agreed, but this bold is part of the interaction issue. We have a majority of people who now use the lesson of defining terms to ignore common sense and over define things. Two saints do not need to define terms, which is why when someone begins defining if nothing else we subconsciously fear that we are not talking to a saint but rather a fairy…
 
LethalMouse said:
Generally post agreed, but this bold is part of the interaction issue. We have a majority of people who now use the lesson of defining terms to ignore common sense and over define things. Two saints do not need to define terms, which is why when someone begins defining if nothing else we subconsciously fear that we are not talking to a saint but rather a fairy…
Click to expand...
I meant define your terms in the context of speaking to someone you don’t (or shouldn’t) trust.

Yes, most often there are implicit assumptions in what we say… When someone says they’ll pick you up from work, you (quite reasonably) assume they mean right afterwards. If they don’t, they need to say so. In that case, THEY need to define their terms, so as not to become the sneaky devilish fairy of the story, which I think was also part of the lesson contained in said folklore.
 
SilverShadow22 said:
I meant define your terms in the context of speaking to someone you don’t (or shouldn’t) trust.

Yes, most often there are implicit assumptions in what we say… When someone says they’ll pick you up from work, you (quite reasonably) assume they mean right afterwards. If they don’t, they need to say so. In that case, THEY need to define their terms, so as not to become the sneaky devilish fairy of the story, which I think was also part of the lesson contained in said folklore.
Click to expand...
Fair point, and agreed. However within that we also have the forum examples. Or general internet debating, in which people might say something like:

Saint: “Your going to go left later”

Fairy: “You’re*” “pfft learn how to type and I might listen to you”

OR

Saint: “Let’s say we have 5 oranges and take away 2, then there would be 3”

Fairy: “But I was talking about apples so your math is now magically wrong because you said orange”

Some of these may not have the intention of harm, but still the human skill number one of denial for an assortment of reasons from the “fairy” not having to acknowledge something they don’t want to, to false outward image etc…

AND an even greater way to use technicalities to side track and side step a convo would be akin to:

Saint: “5 oranges take away 2 and you have 3…that is how subtraction works”

Fairly: “Oranges? what kind? are you sure they were not grapefruits?..Were they from Florida or California? I need details!”

And here the “fairy” has completely ignored whatever point the saint is making by literally just paying attention to whatever else is involved other than the point…

And I would say the prevalence of these things that the number of human fairies, the number of non professional lawyers far outweighs those who are honest even in circles of near saints.

The near saints still have need for denial at times and use the technicalities not in a harmful way like the driving example, but in the example of asking what kind of oranges they are…so for whatever reason they do not have to acknowledge the point of the sentence.
 
I am perfectly capable of acknowledging your point (but forget to say so) and then:

Oh by the way I love oranges! Well, at least mandarin oranges. Those other ones can be hard to peel, especially if they’re little, and I don’t like all the pulp… But pulp is ok in orange juice. Isn’t that weird? Actually I love all the citrus. Except limes. I’m not sure why, but they’re just kinda… Meh. Oh yeah, and kiwis are no good, and I loathe peaches. In fact, when mangoes remind me of peaches, I don’t like them, either. But almonds are related, and I like them. Did you know they crossbreed? That happened to us once, we had peaches with almond-y pits, and almonds with peach-like flesh… Dad took out the almonds to spare the peaches, then the peach tree died anyway. 🤷

… Because that’s actually how my mind works. I leap from one thing to another based on associations that other people don’t follow, and I’m having tons of fun, but maybe I skip verbalizibg every step that happens in my mind because I’m animated and interested and enjoying talking, and next thing I know, they’re mad at me for ‘dissing’ their example and then look at me like I’m crazy for thinking about fruit when they mentioned oranges… Just because the oranges weren’t literal. 😦
 
LethalMouse said:
Years long past, the avg decent human never saw the inside of a court room, now between the 50% divorce rate and who knows how many non marriage divorce custody battles and the love of suing people we have a generation of lawyers which bleeds into everything.

This bleeds into friendships and relationships and into even the forums here as examples are nitpicked irrationally.

An example lol:

Human tells a man to climb Mount Everest and the man goes and walks up a mountain trail 20 feet and goes home.

The human asks the man “why did you break my rule?” The man says “You said climb Mount Everest, which I did, you never said how much :P”

The human “well you got me on technicality you win today.”

GOD tells a man to climb Mount Everest and the human walks the 20 ft and goes home.

God says “why have you disobeyed me?”

The man says “You said climb Mount Everest, which I did, you never said how much :P”

God sends the man to Hell for eternity…

Does no one see the issue with these technicalities?
Click to expand...
But, nobody told the guy he could go home after climbing Mount Everest! :bigyikes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top