Archive for the ‘spirit of the word’ Category

2 Articles On Inequitable Sentencing In England, 1 Article on Narrowmindedness – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 13th february 2012

In Apartheid, Bad By-Laws, bad laws, checks and balances, critical discourse, Fair Chrges, intent, Media Neutrality, media tricks, neurolinguistics, political correctness, politics, preventing vested interest, racism, spirit of the word, subtle insults, unique, vested interest, word of the law on February 13, 2012 at 1:29 pm


Student, 20, arrested for ‘frying hamster in a pan for ‘laughs’ at wild house party’ – by David Baker – Last updated at 12:35 PM on 11th February 2012

Police have arrested a 20-year-old student who is alleged to have cooked a hamster in a frying pan when a raucous house party got out of control.

Officers were called to the flat in York and were left horrified to discover the pet rodent dead in a frying pan in the kitchen.

They had broken up the wild party after calls from neighbours complaining about the noise and it is thought an investigation will now hinge on whether or not the hamster was already dead before it was fried.

Cruel: A student allegedly cooked a pet hamster like this one in a frying pan at a house party in York (file picture)

North Yorkshire Police confirmed that a joint investigation has been launched with the RSPCA over the incident.

A spokesman said ‘A 20-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal.

‘He has been released on bail while inquiries continue.’

According to the RSPCA someone in the UK dials their 24 hour cruelty line, on average, every 30 seconds.

last year they investigated 159,686 cruelty complaints and secured 2,441 convictions by private prosecution to protect animals against those who break the laws.

Last month, Paul Henry was sentenced to six months in jail after he cooked

Callous: Paul Owen Henry, 45, put a cat in a microwave and killed it

a pet cat to death in a microwave in Gainsborough, Lincolnshire.

Lincoln Magistrates Court heard how 45-year-old Henry had cooked his friend’s beloved black and white moggy ‘Suzie’ after he was left home alone at his flat.

How brazen can you get? Thief steals phone from girl’s bag… and poses with it in front of good Samaritan passenger FILMING him

The cat’s owner Andrew Parsons, 38, returned from work to find the remains of the 18-month-old cat in the microwave oven and the words ‘Menu fried cat £1.20’ written on the kitchen wall of the flat.

District Judge John Stobart told Henry, that he was passing the maximum sentence the law allowed after describing it as the ‘worse case of animal cruelty’ he could imagine.

He told Henry the cat was killed in ‘the most brutal and sadistic way’ and added, ‘I can’t think of a worse case of animal cruelty.

‘When Andrews Parsons eventually returned home he was to find his TV broken, his light fitting destroyed and the cat dead in the microwave after suffering the most appalling death.

Prosecutions for animal cruelty have been enforced since 2007, when the Animal Welfare Act became law in England.

The Act places a legal obligation on owners and keepers of animals to care for them properly.

Sick: The writing on the wall found at Mr Parsons’ flat, reading ‘Menu Fried Cat £1.20’. Mr Parsons found Suzie’s body in the microwave

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Who’s going to pay for the jail term? Neither the student nor Henry intends to attack people so not need to imprison, at most get an injunction order against touching or handling cats at least. Sentence Henry to work at an Animal Welfare home at most. As this animal was not bred and intended as a food animal, there should be some outcry, but imprisoning does not make sense. At most microwave Henry (abit) to teach Henry about humane culling and send Henry to study a humane culling course for cats (I suggest Korea where a fine fine made from Cat has been the tradition for years). Henry though should learn the difference between food animals and pets. The mental makeup and socialisation of the 2 types of animals is entirely different, food animals probably being heavily drugged and not given oppoerunity to socialise with their own species. As for the hamster case, if humane culling occured, then no issue, but it is doubtful that humane culling is a skill among racuous teens.




Fines for spitting? Council pushes for right to fine those caught in the act By Daily Mail Reporter Last updated at 1:17 AM on 11th February 2012

Action: Enfield Council are hoping to persuade Communities Secretary Eric Pickles to argue with their proposals to fine people for spitting

A council is hoping to become the first area in Britain to ban spitting in public.

Enfield Council in North London has asked Communities Secretary Eric Pickles to approve a bye-law, after huge local support

More than 3,000 residents signed a petition in favour of a ban.

However, just four  people raised objections during a consultation period.

If Mr Pickles gives the thumbs-up, the council aims to have the ban in place within a month.

Council enforcement officers would be empowered to hand out fixed penalty notices – expected to be around £80 – to anyone caught spitting.

Those refusing to pay could face prosecution and a potential fine of up to £5,000.

Although the borough’s CCTV cameras would not be used to detect incidents of spitting, it is thought that film could be brought in evidence in any court cases.

Christianity under attack: Anger as major court rulings go against British worshippers

Enfield councillor Chris Bond, environment member of the council’s cabinet, said: ‘Spitting is a truly disgusting habit and the vast majority of people are in favour of us banning it.

‘It is now up to the Government to decide whether or not we can ban spitting in this borough and I’d urge them to listen to the views of people living here and give us the ability to tackle this foul practice once and for all.’

Watch out: Anyone caught spitting in Enfield could be fined £80 should the proposals be accepted (Posed by models)

Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards.

The comments below have been moderated in advance.

So, no-one posting comments has ever had a bad cough? You’re walking along, cough, bring up a mouthful of green splodge, you don’t have a hankerchief and you can’t see a bin or a drain…what do you do…chew on it for a while? Impossible to enforce…another fat councillor inventing non-jobs to keep your council tax rolling in to his bank account.

– amanda, gloucester, 11/2/2012 10:45
Rating   538

I though spitting was an offence I can remember signs saying £5 fine

– george, Hitchin, 11/2/2012 10:45
Rating   340

Can we start with the Great game of football. Some of the players need an IQ test. They may have the cars money and WAGS but they need to be taught some manners.

– Toto Kubwa, Cyprus, 11/2/2012 10:43
Rating   493

What next fined for breathing.They should fine bankers and politicians for ruining our lives and it should not be £80.

– cyril, bedford, 11/2/2012 10:38
Rating   381

Not hard to see why it’s become popular watch any football match, some of our players could spit for England !

– Birdseye, Chepstow, 11/2/2012 10:37
Rating   299

Being old I can remember when this was an offence – a finable offence – just about everywhere. Question is, who decided that this should be dropped? Some trendy maybe. I believe that the offence was a local by-law offence, not an offence against a Parliamentary Act. I suppose we’ll now see arguments over just who is responsible for enforcing this with the police telling us yet again it isn’t their job and that they are too busy doing other things more important. Interesting that there are never published figures showing the number of police actually on duty but in police stations (i.e. an hourly graph) as a comparison of those in the streets dealing or preventing offences.

– Norman Speight, London UK, 11/2/2012 10:34
Click to rate     Rating   173

Report abuse

To right, on the spot fine or turn up at the police station to pay your fine. I’m thed up with seeing people spitting out there flem onto the pavement of which I walk upon. Some parts of Coventry are bad enough dodging all the dog mess but I have to keep my eyes on the pavement looking out for flem. It’s dirty and can spread all sorts of illness around.

– Paul, Coventry, 11/2/2012 10:34
Click to rate     Rating   244

Report abuse

“A council is hoping to become the first area in Britain to ban spitting in public.” Spitting in public was illegal before WW II. I remember the notices on lamp posts forbidding it on pain of a £5 fine. More than a weeks wages at that time and there were more police around to enforce it.

– John, Surrey, 11/2/2012 10:34
Click to rate     Rating   213

Report abuse

How will you get the youth of today to stop spitting when “sports men” set the example by doing it all the time. One of the prominent signs on buses used to be “No spitting” one reason for this was that it was considered to be a source of spreading TB which was rampant in the 40’s and 50’s. We are now faced with even deadlier TB so it now would be a good time to stamp out this filthy habit on the streets and on the play fields, start by fining the big earning football players.

– Bev, Gillingham Dorset, 11/2/2012 10:34
Click to rate     Rating   237

Report abuse

What next? Farting in public. I don’t like spitting as much as the next person but feel this is going too far. I run long distance and when I do I produce overwhelming amounts of congested rubbish off my chest which is often black (I don’t smoke I live in a city). Do you really expect me to swallow that, or should I carry a spitoon?

– Nan, NY state, 11/2/2012 10:32

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Depends on where the spit actually goes (notwithstanding where it was intended to go – grassy knolls where people are not going to be sitting, drains, or down drain covers should be ignored) and the intention of the spitter or reason for spitting. No need to fine, an option to clean up the mess can be given in lieu of fining. Also a 80 sterling fine is too high. It’s a spit wad, and will not cost 80 sterling to clean up. Equitable remember? How about an 8 sterling fine instead? That is along the lines of 1-2 mins of cleaning work by any workers. In a high volume area in fact, the pedestrian traffic would render the fine meaningless, please use common sense. If someone was fined for farting it’d be similar. In less than a minute nothing would remain, so how could anyone expect to pay for that. You’d have all kinds of people accusing the police of being malicious and making up stories instead.

Word against word, that sort of thing – IF 80 sterling (because 80 sterling is too much) the sheer unfairness factor would doubtless result in challenges to the case and refusal to cooperate. As for 8 sterling, being fairly reasonable, would not meet such resistence because the fairness factor is there. But if they try to cut the civilian throats with cuthroat fines, doubtless the citizen will see fit to retaliate in whatever form, namely simple denials against the offensively high fine for an inconsequential offence. If the police lays a hand on the indignant person about to walk away, assault reports etc.. will result. Society will become less harmonious because a spit wad becomes a reason to fine heavily. Orwellian England strikes again!




Dwarf left disabled after he was picked up and thrown to the ground blames England rugby team’s World Cup antics for copycat attack – by Emma Reynolds – Last updated at 3:29 PM on 16th January 2012

Career-ending: Martin Henderson was celebrating his birthday at a pub when he was picked up and dropped

A dwarf who is facing life in a wheelchair after being picked up and thrown to the ground has blamed England’s rugby team for giving his attacker the idea.

Martin Henderson suffered injuries to his back and legs after being dropped on to the hard ground as he had a cigarette outside a pub in Wincanton, Somerset.

The life-changing attack on the 37-year-old came shortly after the England players visited a ‘dwarf-tossing’ competition at the World Cup in New Zealand.

The stars, including Zara Phillips’s husband Mike Tindall, were disciplined for attending the event, as well as for other acts of bad behaviour on the tour.

Mr Henderson believes that the violence that has put an end to his promising acting career could have been inspired by the news story about the players’ night out in September.

‘The England players had been in trouble for going to a dwarf tossing event and this might have given this guy the idea,’ he said.

The rugby stars were seen downing shots as they partied in a Queenstown bar called Altitude, which was hosting a ‘Mad Midget Weekend’.

This was also the night that Tindall, newly married into the Royal Family, was captured on CCTV kissing ex-girlfriend Jessica Palmer.

The night out followed a disastrous opening match for the England team, setting the tone for their appalling performance on and off the field during the tournament.

Mr Henderson, who suffers from achondroplasia dwarfism and spinal stenosis, said his legs went numb after the callous attack.

He said: ‘I had surgery on my back in 2010 and was making really good progress and my surgeon was really happy with me.
Party time: Dan Cole and Steve Thompson were among the England players who were on a night out in the Altitude Bar in Queenstown

Party time: Dan Cole and Steve Thompson were among the England players who were on a night out in the Altitude Bar in Queenstown

‘But then this happened and it’s kicked it all off again. I keep falling over and I found out today that I have fractured my arm.

‘Every time I stand up I don’t know if I’m going to fall over. I will have to use a wheelchair and I won’t get any acting jobs.

Paralysed rugby player who thought he would never have a family defies doctors to walk, wed, and have a baby daughter

‘I just hope they catch him. I don’t usually have any trouble and I know that I have never upset anyone in Wincanton.’
Numb: Mr Henderson, 37, said he struggles to stay upright and often falls over following the attack

Numb: Mr Henderson, 37, said he struggles to stay upright and often falls over following the attack

Mr Henderson has made an allegation of assault and police have launched an investigation and issued a description of the offender.

The attack on the 4ft 2ins man from Milborne Port, near Yeovil, happened outside Wincanton’s White Horse pub.

Mr Henderson has appeared on TV’s Bigger Breakfast and as one of the seven dwarfs in the pantomime Snow White.

He also appeared alongside famous dwarf actor Warwick Davis in the TV mini-series 10th Kingdom – an adventure programme featuring Snow White, Cinderella, and Little Red Riding Hood.

Now he fears he will not be hired for any more acting jobs. ‘We were having a good night out to celebrate my birthday and there were a few of us drinking together in a corner of the pub,’ he said.

‘I went outside for a cigarette and the next thing I know I’m suddenly in the air and someone has got hold of me. I was then dropped on to my back on to the hard floor.

‘From what I remember, there was only one person involved but it was very  scary as I didn’t know what was going on.

‘I guess I was an easy target and the only reason I was picked on was because I am small.

‘People’s attitudes to me when I go out can be pretty cruel. Most are OK but you get the odd idiot who will make fun and start laughing at me.

‘You just have to ignore it but this is the first time I have been picked up and thrown about.’

Mr Henderson described the attacker as being white, about 5ft 8ins tall and of a slim build with dark hair and a hooded top.

A police spokesperson said: ‘Officers investigating would like to speak to anyone who may have been in the pub on the night of October 7.

‘It follows an incident in which a small person was picked up by an unknown person in the bar and dropped.’

Here’s what other readers have said. Why not debate this issue live on our message boards.

The comments below have been moderated in advance.

why use the term “a dwarf” ? Would “man” not suffice? At the end of the day a man of normal height would probably sustain injury in similar circumstances.

– facts, poundland, 13/1/2012 12:26
Rating   33

What an incredibly cruel thing to do…but l think going to a commercial venue where they do so-called “dwarf tossing” is also horrible and if it was up to me l would punish the whole team for bringing the sport into disrepute. Just because the people being tossed are getting paid does not excuse such foul behaviour.

– Alien McWeirdo, Some Wild Abandoned Star, 13/1/2012 11:13
Rating   27

I hope he has stopped smoking!!!

– facts, poundland, 13/1/2012 11:08
Rating   41

Dreadful but….”Mr Henderson believes that the violence that has put an end to his promising acting career ” (sic)…………….Oh please.

– J H , Bournemouth, 13/1/2012 10:53
Rating   38

Surely he should blame the ‘dwarf tossing’ competition organisers…dont hate the player, hate the game…

– jb, Glasgow, 13/1/2012 10:44
Rating   4

He should take them to a small claims court

– Kerry, Berkshire, 13/1/2012 10:15
Rating   8

Disgraceful. How could anyone stoop so low?

– Charles, Auckland, New Zealand, 13/1/2012 09:38
Rating   30

I sincerely hope they catch the brainless moron who did this and that he ends up in prison for a long time. However, I’m not holding my breath on either count.

– Scotty, Cambs., UK., 13/1/2012 08:44
Rating   37

Horrible and not right what happened to him. I’d quit smoking just to be safe if I was him.

– Cartman, Denver, USA, 13/1/2012 05:21
Rating   28

Laura, England What’s wrong with you?

– mew, england, 13/1/2012 01:47

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Another form of dehumanising objectification from mere difference leading to treatment as an object. Under the correct circumstances, the sheer difference and objectifiability gives the objectified person great power, the space between differences a source of energy no end, hence the popularity of/or the remarkable presence of LGBTs. However in a rowdy crowd filled with rough and uneducated (ineducable) people intolerant of differences in general suffering back home or at work or at school, we can see how enthusiasm for sport can become violence from sheer intolerance.

Too fat, too thin, too foreign, too short, too tall, too strange, and formerly in most of the first world too gay (effeminate or campily flouncing around doesn’t help though there  should be a place for that too) or too LGBT, (this is a severe problem in the 3rd world if you look at the laws and refusal of MPs to demand it’s change . . . ) all result in the closed minded, poorly traveled, or simply fundamentalistic mind/society intent on defending ‘comfort zones’ converting or beating into conformity, being too lazy to grow new neurons to form new views – ‘clinging to guns and religion’ as it were. They instead respond in the basest manner possible. Similarly the psyche establishment poisons and electrifies, implants, controls any who do not fit into a society to preserve ‘peace’ which actually is a form of stagnation.

Who needs to be so uniform? Only the conventional would be so uniform. In general the well read and upper crust types have more excess/neuronal energy at their command and are thus able to absorb and buffer against differences, in part media needs to present and normalise the strange and uncommon, the thought provoking, even jarring, though not too jarring and not too often while retaining ‘safe zone’ channels for the weak minded cowering in their own insularism. Meanwhile yob preferred sports venues, or some political parties with narrow views are not the best place to be different in. The comfort zone issue is insanely protected as all which are not human are objects. So they threw Henderson because of stupidity and lack of exposure to dwarfs. Suggest that tv programmes include HOURLY all sorts and varieties of people for a start, then later the more unique and strange and different the better. Insularism of a different sort, mental laziness, racism sliding into outright Nazi-ness, then Fundamentalism, finally APARTHEID and you know the rest ‘Aryans’ on crusade in ‘sand n1gg3r’ country . . . appreciate diversity don’t abuse diversity. Dwarves should form their own colonies and refine those genes by marrying the next healthiest dwarf. In the event that some virus wipes out entire populations but leaves dwarves alive, the next generation of humans could well be midgets only.

How to appreciate criticism — Fahri Azzat ( – 4th March 2010

In advice, critical discourse, criticism, intent, social freedoms, spirit of the word, word of the law on February 10, 2012 at 9:50 am

MARCH 4 — Many of us take criticism the wrong way. We get angry. We paint the critic as the enemy. We hate them. Try to suppress if not annihilate them.

Many of us take criticism the wrong way. We get angry. We paint the critic as the enemy. We hate them. Try to suppress if not annihilate them.

It does not have to be this way. There is a better way to take criticism and make it of use to not just us but everybody.

Before I explain that way, allow me to first define criticism: it is simply the act of pointing out and explaining what is wrong or does not meet certain necessary or required standards. The necessity of an explanation is very important. Without it there can be no valid criticism, only unfair abuse.

From this we can appreciate that criticism is a vital and necessary expression towards improving something, be it an institution, a person, an idea, etc. It is applicable any and everywhere because perfection does not exist in reality — only in our heads or on paper (wherever reality does not need intervene).

The implication of reality’s imperfection is that everything can be improved in some aspect, facet or other. Whoever thinks otherwise ceases to live in reality and enters the realm of illusions. It follows that whoever resists criticism in that same moment resists reality. It also means that that person is very deep into and enthralled by their own illusions, which would undoubtedly find little evidence in reality. If there were an abundance of it that person would rather live in reality and face up to it.

This is generally why many people do not like criticism and some cannot stand it. The act of criticism inevitably results in the shattering of powerful personal illusions. It draws a person back into reality. It reminds them of reality’s harshness. It insists that they face up to their weaknesses and failings. And at the end of it, criticism implicitly demands improvement to those areas that illusion used to rule. Those areas usually tend to be personal and intimate areas of the self. This is also why some people become enraged when they are criticized — those areas tend to be the most sensitive to one’s ego.

A lot of this hurt and pain felt from criticism, I strongly believe stems from a lack of understanding of what criticism is and how to deal properly deal with it. I have explained already how important criticism is as a tool for improvement and growth.

Before I explain how criticism should be handled better, I need to first address the supposed distinction between ‘constructive criticism’ and ‘negative criticism’. Sometimes I hear those being criticised lashing back, for example, by saying, ‘I don’t want to hear negative criticism. I will only listen to constructive criticism!’

This is of course utter nonsense for this simple reason: constructive criticism is simply criticism with suggestions on how to improve. Negative criticism does not contain suggestions; it only focuses on the negative aspects. With ‘negative criticism’ the person criticized has to work out where and what those areas for improvement are from the criticism. With ‘constructive criticism’, the critic identifies those areas and offers suggestions for consideration. So the difference between them is only the effort the person criticized has to put into discovering those areas for improvement. That is why whenever I hear someone lash that in reply, I know that they are either lazy or do not want to hear criticism.

Now let me return to the main: how to deal with criticism better. I will use the concept of an idea to illustrate this.

Nobody likes to be told their idea is not good enough. The seemingly natural implication of being told your idea is not good enough is to think that you, as a person, are not good enough. We tend to think this because the proposed idea emanates from us, from our thoughts, our brains and so in a sense, it is personal to us.

This is perhaps why some people take criticism so personally. They think a criticism of their idea is a criticism and judgment on their integrity as a person. They think because their idea is defective in some sense, they too are similarly defective in their person in some respect.

This thinking is, of course, deeply flawed. Allow me to explain why.

Firstly, though an idea maybe shaped by us personally, the moment it is expressed, it ceases to become ours. It becomes everybody’s idea. The idea of flight may have come from Leonardo da Vinci, but he does not own it. The idea of the wired communications came from Alexander Graham Bell but he does not own it. Sir Timothy John Berners-Lee came up with the idea of the internet and he now does not own it. Though an idea may come from us, it is never personal to us. We are merely the fortunate or unfortunate vessels through which ideas pass through into expression. Though a part of us will always be a part of that idea, it is limited only to the idea’s heritage — not its ownership or future development.

The first lesson we can take from this is that do not be too personal about our ideas. They are not really ours. Ideas may come from man, but they are the property of mankind.

Secondly, though ideas spring from us, they will never be complete or thorough enough to define us. From philosophy we can observe that even the greatest of philosophers (men vastly wiser and more intelligent than the common man in terms of refinement of thought) are still unable to craft a general theory so wide, deep and thorough and so complete to define human nature. If the most powerful of philosophical ideas cannot define our nature (but they do provide great insight), common ideas are far less capable of representing the core of our being.

The implication is that though we are related to our ideas, they do not define us. And so criticism of our ideas cannot mean criticism of our integrity as a human being. These are two separate things. This is why it is said that our ideas are like our children. Children spring from us but they are completely separate independent beings with their own arc and path of development. Just like children, ideas though they reflect us in some ways, that reflection will never be enough to define us completely much less permit judgment about personal and intimate areas of ourselves i.e. our integrity.

The third lesson to be drawn is that criticism of our ideas is not a criticism of our person. It has nothing to do with us. Our narcissism just makes us think it does. So ensure that your narcissism levels are suppressed when you listen to criticism. If not, you will think the criticism is all about you instead of your idea.

Fourthly, all ideas are potentially flawed, especially at their germination and even at later, higher levels of refinement. An influential idea in one era may be discovered to be wrong or obsolete later. If you want examples just go through the history of science, medicine, and technology. So many times have ideas and theories been revised through the course of their respective histories. In another sense, ideas are also like art. There is always a sense of incompleteness about them and so room for completion. The great Picasso once said,

Woe to you the day it is said that you are finished! To finish a work? To finish a picture? What nonsense! To finish it means to be through with it, to kill it, to rid it of its soul — to give it its final blow; the most unfortunate one for the painter as well as for the picture.

Paula Bachtiger Kling, also an artist, explains the thrill of an artistic piece of work, “The best part is: I’m never finished! There are always new angles, new shadows, new lights …”

And what is art really but the mere expression of an idea in a less explicit and obvious medium? All of art, philosophy and science demonstrate that all expressions of ideas are necessarily incomplete, flawed and perpetually ready for improvement.

So to expect to propose an idea of such perfection expressed with such perfection that it becomes impervious to any sort of criticism is misguided as it is impossible.

Fifthly, criticism is subjective. Though the criticism itself may be objective (in the sense that it is free from bias and attempts to address reality), each critic comes from a subjective point of view — his (in the sense that it is unique as each human being is). Any idea therefore bears the potential to be criticised from infinite point of views. Not all of them are accurate, correct, strong or bona fide. These are often obvious and we can quickly dismiss them. But much criticism is also valid (because each idea has many facets) and this is when we must pay close attention to them.

How would we know?

If our mind does not discover it then our heart will tell us because it would sting if not hurt; make us angry; and provoke us to lash back maliciously. This is when we must resist the reflexive urge to do so, shut up and listen as attentively as we can. Valid criticism is the one that stings the most.

Finally all expressed ideas are inherently flawed and incomplete. If we see neither, we just have not looked hard or waited long enough. Do not hope or expect to come up with ‘the perfect idea’ and to express it perfectly. It does not exist. So either learn to expect and deal with criticism correctly or waste yourself in getting angry about it each and every time.

If we can understand these lessons, practise them to the point of internalization and recall them whenever we are criticized, I am certain that we would in time learn not to fear criticism but to welcome it. We would also learn that each instance of criticism is an opportunity for improvement, an opportunity to refine our ideas and be more productive with them.

We would learn not to look at the critic as a source of annoyance or hatred but as a friend. This is perhaps what Jesus meant when he commanded mankind to love your enemies (Matthew 5:44).

We only think someone our enemy because we do not understand yet how they can be our friend or a useful source of improvement for ourselves.

Once we train ourselves to take criticism we may find those we thought our enemies to be our best friends in waiting.
It does not have to be this way. There is a better way to take criticism and make it of use to not just us but everybody.

Before I explain that way, allow me to first define criticism: it is simply the act of pointing out and explaining what is wrong or does not meet certain necessary or required standards. The neces

Fishing for minnows . . .

(1) “The first lesson we can take from this is that do not be too personal about our ideas. They are not really ours. Ideas may come from man, but they are the property of mankind.”

This point is acknowledged on Page 5, line 6 and line 7. It was discarded by the rightful owner, just a restorer and custodian . . .

(2) ” So to expect to propose an idea of such perfection expressed with such perfection that it becomes impervious to any sort of criticism is misguided as it is impossible. . . .  Finally all expressed ideas are inherently flawed and incomplete. ”

It is actually possible because certain ideas are limited in scope and reach, and thus can indeed be perfected with time. Such as the wheel or wing design in aerodynamics which look to have peaked.

(3)  Do not hope or expect to come up with ‘the perfect idea’ and to express it perfectly. It does not exist. So either learn to expect and deal with criticism correctly or waste yourself in getting angry about it each and every time.

Not alone a person can’t. But a sufficient number of people in working in tandem over a period of time on CERTAIN projects as mentioned above can and have done so. See previous examples of wing and wheel.

(4) ” So either learn to expect and deal with criticism correctly or waste yourself in getting angry about it each and every time. ”

That is assuming ‘yourself’ does get angry. But are they to begin with at all? And if so what about? Don’t assume the worst, lots of even minded people out there, privacy when invaded however does cause upset . . .  after all lots of people like to be fully dressed before they are seen, don’t take that choice from them and then expect them to be happy about it, they make that choice not others, to be seen that is . . .

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Nice article, abit punchy, abit skewed AGAINST, but expected given the difficulty of the endeavour. So walk with vigour with the ideas expressed by the writer, and avoid going off on gently counter-intuitive tangents and offer a helping hand to those floundering in their pathos and insanity, inability to accept differences in people . . . ah the limits again, so what else could be expected sigh.

Long past the friends and enemies thing, at this range and mobs of closed minded mob minded fools, anyway it is too nebulous to presume . . . but every journey however begins with a step, so here’s a reminder with those who care to, just like when BN had 90% of the vote . . .