08-08-2016, 10:59 PM
55,
Thank you for replying.
In answer to your question I believe I made myself clear in earlier posts. If someone wants to valorize Arnold as a role model then be prepared for others who will disagree. I outlined Arnold's failings and my criteria for a role model. It may a different opinion to others and if anyone takes umbrage at that then it is not my intention to upset people, merely having a discussion.
In clarification to your posts concerning me. We both know I did not say Arnold was a 'scumbag'; a personal insult. I believe you are using the term to imply my position lacks credibility. I do however believe he is a narcissist who has focussed his 'can do' attitude on achieving self-indulgent goals. Also, that many of his achievements have come at the expense of others.
I forgive you for the slight where you made reference to Stan. It does not dignify a response.
Yes, I believe that a persons exploits tarnish any mental skills they lay claim to. As I said, unless we can completely separate any proprietary ownership of these mental skills from the person then it is difficult not to consider the person along with the skills.
I was not aware Arnold possessed any particular skillset other than the generic few steps I read some years ago in his biography and listed in an earlier post. I think we all know that Arnold is not a Marksman. I am also unaware that shooters use his skillset, or a skillset that Arnold also happens to use. I believe those steps he uses to achieve his goals have limited merit for shooters. What I do think would benefit shooters is possessing his drive, albeit focussed on achieving shooting outcomes.
Please note, I had the courtesy to answer your question and now invite you to do the same (previous post). Can you live with a poster having a different opinion to a moderator?
Thank you for replying.
In answer to your question I believe I made myself clear in earlier posts. If someone wants to valorize Arnold as a role model then be prepared for others who will disagree. I outlined Arnold's failings and my criteria for a role model. It may a different opinion to others and if anyone takes umbrage at that then it is not my intention to upset people, merely having a discussion.
In clarification to your posts concerning me. We both know I did not say Arnold was a 'scumbag'; a personal insult. I believe you are using the term to imply my position lacks credibility. I do however believe he is a narcissist who has focussed his 'can do' attitude on achieving self-indulgent goals. Also, that many of his achievements have come at the expense of others.
I forgive you for the slight where you made reference to Stan. It does not dignify a response.
Yes, I believe that a persons exploits tarnish any mental skills they lay claim to. As I said, unless we can completely separate any proprietary ownership of these mental skills from the person then it is difficult not to consider the person along with the skills.
I was not aware Arnold possessed any particular skillset other than the generic few steps I read some years ago in his biography and listed in an earlier post. I think we all know that Arnold is not a Marksman. I am also unaware that shooters use his skillset, or a skillset that Arnold also happens to use. I believe those steps he uses to achieve his goals have limited merit for shooters. What I do think would benefit shooters is possessing his drive, albeit focussed on achieving shooting outcomes.
Please note, I had the courtesy to answer your question and now invite you to do the same (previous post). Can you live with a poster having a different opinion to a moderator?