INITIAL NOTE: This text is intended as a study, something "light" on one of the basic laws of the offense written. Not intended to be a professional analysis on the subject empirically simply conclusions by the author ... "Osease me."
say "you can offend more than it wants," he also said that "whoever gets it follows, that I have even heard that" if you can. " For the two latter, on offense is a contradiction, but if relativize the issues, not are both.
Why would anyone be offended when you receive a critique harmful? Eye, which I do not mean harmless to offensive, but a brash and disrespectful.
to offend somebody has to do with the alleged offense, an attempt to destroy something that has some degree of illusion. In our particular case, most of those who write and publish here, do not rely too much on our quality, but would go on editor editor looking for an opportunity that would not hesitate to exploit, but we put forward, if not hope, in texts set forth. Our desire is to please, however, we are aware (I hope) that this is not always can be. On the other hand, most also expect a little help from whom we read, we want guidance on how to please them and also how to make fewer mistakes. The last thing we want is for someone to behave as "famosillos" Risto, with devastating and destructive criticism, but they were right, there are more than a vain boast of a bad critic who believes in possession of ultimate truth. Come on, it attacks the illusions of the author, most of jealousy that his only true wisdom because knowledge is the weak point as to where it hurts.
Well, I think I lost the clip, as they say, revenge, because all this is that I intend to illustrate, the closest thing we have, the meaning of harm and the method to achieve this.
All this is possible when the person you intended to offend, has a higher security level or places no illusion or vague hope in the matter at hand. Thus, an occasional offender would be without achieving its purpose.
For example, I remember a couple of years ago I met a former high school classmate and we talked. He told me that her friend had been coladita for me and I was very surprised that statement. Always remembered getting me for almost everything. At first bothered me, but over time it went dead. 'No. But it was a pretty girl and perhaps because of this, I returned the attacks. This ex-colleague recalled an episode that I had forgotten. Apparently one of those distant days when trying to impose their views on our working group, I compromised with their ideas and she came out of the pot. Both get angry, however, she had a very hard and I cried to her friend, is the one I found.
- It's horrible! - He said - I can not agree with him and he never attacked, is that I'm brighter than him, smarter, but it provoked and angry just me and him achieve ends to impose their views, but that's not what bothers me ... what bothers me is what you think of me.
What she had not stopped to think that I had taken his ideas and had become adapted to our needs, but such was his desire to dominate everything to the last detail that was only angry. But that was not the issue. The question was, again according to the friend who told me that at one point tried to really hurt me with his words and told me it was horrible ... yes, it sounds like. I said that I thought was very handsome, but it really was ugly, of course, contrary to what she expected, nor did I bother, I even told "I know, so what?". The reason, she could not understand is that I had never raised that could be beautiful and that she told me I was ugly heave brought me completely. His drama was that to other people who were not me, it had become clear that coladita for me was that I believed just the opposite and that was precisely his drama. In this example the conclusion that no one can pretend to be offended by something that already has taken or that does not really care. Of course it could also not be offended because the opinion of the person who practiced it, was not considered relevant or valid. This was not the case because when expressing that opinion in public if they affect the possibility that others sympathized with that view.
The other case is more difficult to demonstrate by way of example, when you have full confidence in its value could be the equivalent of one's opinion was valid to replace itself. Surely we have met many people of those we call "very smug," ie, they believe the absolute best and nothing can change their mind. But in this case, mistakes can be tragic perspective, nobody has the capacity to warn of a large bump that sooner or later have to take: the disappointment.
final conclusion: The offense affects liable only to the offense and it should interfere in one basic weakness is the lack of confidence in something or someone you have sustained a few illusions or hopes. Outside this area the offense loses its effectiveness.
0 comments:
Post a Comment