Gandhi! [modified]
-
Ilíon wrote:
The Ghandi no one knows[^]
If you can't spell his last name correctly (It is Gandhi, not Ghandi); you have no rights to comment on him :mad:
-
modified on Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:52 PM
Ilíon wrote:
The Gandhi no one knows
The Gandhi Nobody Knows? How presumptuous of Mr Richard Grenier. But what else would one expect from an elitist intellectual? However, snarkiness aside, I have to thank you for posting it, as it is an interesting read (still reading), and all antidotes to 'greatness' are welcome.
Bob Emmett
-
Ilíon wrote:
The Gandhi no one knows
The Gandhi Nobody Knows? How presumptuous of Mr Richard Grenier. But what else would one expect from an elitist intellectual? However, snarkiness aside, I have to thank you for posting it, as it is an interesting read (still reading), and all antidotes to 'greatness' are welcome.
Bob Emmett
-
Simply put, anyone who someone labels great, is generally someone they only know half the story about. Some people do great things, but I know of very few great people.
How do you separate great deeds from a great person? Or, in other words, the deed from the character?
-
Ilíon wrote:
The Gandhi no one knows
The Gandhi Nobody Knows? How presumptuous of Mr Richard Grenier. But what else would one expect from an elitist intellectual? However, snarkiness aside, I have to thank you for posting it, as it is an interesting read (still reading), and all antidotes to 'greatness' are welcome.
Bob Emmett
-
How do you separate great deeds from a great person? Or, in other words, the deed from the character?
-
How do you separate great deeds from a great person? Or, in other words, the deed from the character?
The deed is the legacy, the character is who they actually were. These are generally fairly different things, and I generally require someone be a decent person before I consider them to be great. Some maniacal backstabbing money hungry idiot may manage to create a corporate empire, do something great, but at the end of the day they aren't even a decent person.
-
I try to avoid using the word 'nobody' (except for effect) -- it has always struck me as the word kindergartners, and ill-educated adults, use in place of 'no one.'
Ilíon wrote:
I try to avoid using the word 'nobody' (except for effect) -- it has always struck me as the word kindergartners, and ill-educated adults, use in place of 'no one.'
Title: The Gandhi Nobody Knows Author: Richard Grenier Hardcover: 118 pages Publisher: Thomas Nelson Publishers (Jul 1983) ISBN-10: 0840753799 ISBN-13: 978-0840753793 I was merely quoting the title of your link, which is also the title of the published work. The word was emphasised because I thought it presumptuous of him to assume that nobody or no one, other than he, knew these details.
Bob Emmett Objectives: Total Domination of the World (postponed until 2018).
-
Ilíon wrote:
I try to avoid using the word 'nobody' (except for effect) -- it has always struck me as the word kindergartners, and ill-educated adults, use in place of 'no one.'
Title: The Gandhi Nobody Knows Author: Richard Grenier Hardcover: 118 pages Publisher: Thomas Nelson Publishers (Jul 1983) ISBN-10: 0840753799 ISBN-13: 978-0840753793 I was merely quoting the title of your link, which is also the title of the published work. The word was emphasised because I thought it presumptuous of him to assume that nobody or no one, other than he, knew these details.
Bob Emmett Objectives: Total Domination of the World (postponed until 2018).
Bob Emmett wrote:
The word was emphasised because I thought it presumptuous of him to assume that nobody or no one, other than he, knew these details.
Please! it's a common trope to use "nobody" or "no one" in this manner ... he's contrasting (what he claims to be) the truth with "what everyone knows" (and which happens to be a pious myth).
-
Bob Emmett wrote:
The word was emphasised because I thought it presumptuous of him to assume that nobody or no one, other than he, knew these details.
Please! it's a common trope to use "nobody" or "no one" in this manner ... he's contrasting (what he claims to be) the truth with "what everyone knows" (and which happens to be a pious myth).