LogFAQs > #933382648

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, Database 6 ( 01.01.2020-07.18.2020 ), DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	have you ever swallowed your pride and just said that youre wrong at work?
Kyuubi4269 01/23/20 4:18:15 PM #26:	LinkPizza posted... Harm my reputation how? I said, If Im wrong, Ill admit it. And if Im not, I wont. So what the hell are you even talking about? And I said: Kyuubi4269 posted... If you're not bothered then you're not proud of your reputation for being right. You don't have a reputation in the first place so there's nothing there to be proud of or lose. The thing about an "if" is that there's a declared circumstance that is presumed and the statement is based on this presumed circumstance. LinkPizza posted... Not only that, but if I argue Im right when Im clearly wrong, that hurts my reputation even more than admitting Im wrong. Because you have pride in a reputation for being honest, not for being right. LinkPizza posted... it shouldnt be a pride thing to admit youre wrong. It can be a pride thing to accept damage to the reputation, regardless of if that damage is due. It's not really reasonable to speak of "shoulds" when talking about a deadly sin, pride in general is not a "should". wwinterj25 posted... Better than having a reputation for being a argumentative, antagonistic person though. Somebody who is not always right is objectively worse than somebody who can be wrong. Somebody who is argumentative and antagonistic is bad when directed at you but good when directed at someone you don't like. It's really circumstantial. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:933382648] in have you e... [t:78354334]...</cite> <quote>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>Harm my reputation how? I said, If Im wrong, Ill admit it. And if Im not, I wont. So what the hell are you even talking about?</quote> And I said: Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>If you're not bothered then you're not proud of your reputation for being right.</quote> You don't have a reputation in the first place so there's nothing there to be proud of or lose. The thing about an "if" is that there's a declared circumstance that is presumed and the statement is based on this presumed circumstance. LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>Not only that, but if I argue Im right when Im clearly wrong, that hurts my reputation even more than admitting Im wrong.</quote> Because you have pride in a reputation for being honest, not for being right. LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>it shouldnt be a pride thing to admit youre wrong.</quote> It can be a pride thing to accept damage to the reputation, regardless of if that damage is due. It's not really reasonable to speak of "shoulds" when talking about a deadly sin, pride in general is not a "should". wwinterj25 posted...</cite> <quote>Better than having a reputation for being a argumentative, antagonistic person though.</quote> Somebody who is not always right is objectively worse than somebody who can be wrong. Somebody who is argumentative and antagonistic is bad when directed at you but good when directed at someone you don't like. It's really circumstantial. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1