(June 13, 2014 at 1:43 pm)Rhythm Wrote: But isn't that the point? For a guideline to be useful it ought to be difficult to "twist it" to imagine a scenario in which the guideline was counterproductive. Especially if that scenario crops up with regularity...like idiots do. Eh? The lack of aggression is most definitely not always useful either, hooah. In fact, when aggression is the best tool for the job it is very effectively used in a swift, decisive, and insurmountable way. Shock and awe. Make em put their heads down and stay down - on a dime. Overwhelming weight of payload, sustained covering fire..etc When you call for artillery, you don't want the guy with the pistol showing up asking where to fire...you want the big guns, aggression.
Again, twisting words. It was implied that I was talking about aggression in your daily life, not in war. Obviously, aggression is useful in battle, but I don't really want to get caught up in these petty word games you seem to like.
And you're wrong about guidelines being useful only if they are unable to be twisted. Anything can be twisted, that doesn't devalue the lesson behind the guideline. The Muslim extremeists regularly twist their religious guidelines, but many of their premises, if taken for what they were originally meant could be very useful in their lives.
I'm not speaking to the validity of their religion, only the fact that your assessment of a "twistable guideline" is dead wrong and quite frankly, simply ridiculous.
