|
Post by fretslider on Jul 10, 2011 13:11:21 GMT -5
I suppose that is to some extent inevitable though, but reconciliation doesn't have to mean becoming bosom buddies, only ceasing to be outright enemies. It takes two...
|
|
Jessiealan
xr
Member of the Month, October 2013
Posts: 8,726
|
Post by Jessiealan on Jul 10, 2011 15:32:19 GMT -5
Never do you mind, Fret. It would take a great deal for me hold out my hand again to someone who had spit in it in the past. You should not even care.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jul 10, 2011 16:25:00 GMT -5
Never do you mind, Fret. It would take a great deal for me hold out my hand again to someone who had spit in it in the past. You should not even care. I know exactly what you mean, jessie. Damn right.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 17, 2011 1:33:33 GMT -5
Erasmus, I think you are right that people with serious personal differences can meet at a certain level to have putlic contact without drawn swords ... even work on projects together and belong to the same social organizations. OTOH, are you suggesting reconsiliation must involve shared respect? If so, I do believe there are situations where respect can never be regained. Wrestling in the street may be a bit over the top, but linking arms in friendship won't happen, either. 100% with you on that....surface civilisation as you say..not wrestling but not buddy buddy....just tollorating
|
|
Erasmus
Moderatorz
Deep Thought Mod
"We do not take prisoners - we liberate them" - http://www.aeonbytegnosticradio.com
Posts: 2,489
|
Post by Erasmus on Jul 17, 2011 19:02:58 GMT -5
Erasmus, I think you are right that people with serious personal differences can meet at a certain level to have putlic contact without drawn swords ... even work on projects together and belong to the same social organizations. OTOH, are you suggesting reconsiliation must involve shared respect? If so, I do believe there are situations where respect can never be regained. Wrestling in the street may be a bit over the top, but linking arms in friendship won't happen, either. Well yes, this is what I've said - several times over in fact. It is very common in international politics where agreement to the end of open hostilities and respect of opposing positions rarely prevents each side from doing all it can to interpret the agreement in its favour, sneak round everything not specifically covered, but accept the general principle of each other's rights and desist from all-out war. the situations between Israel and Palestine and Ethiopia and Eritrea are of that kind of cold war realpolitik while still disputing all details that it is possible to dispute. Burying the hatchet is a cessation of hostilities, not a commencement of friendship. It may well be like Robert Frost's surly neighbour believing in the necessity of a wall to delineate sides even though the nature of their respective properties made it quite clear which was whose. It can also mean professionalism (or possibly money-grubbing). The fact that my boss once remarked of somebody "I wouldn't say goodbye to him if he was falling off a cliff" did not stop him from taking the man's commission as a word processing bureau to prepare his formal legal case against the police (which he quite naturally lost). There have been notable occasions when personal reconciliation has gone much further and old men realise what fools they were to believe and behave as they did when teenage, but there is no requirement for reconciliation to go any further than mutual respect for the right to hold a belief, whatever the opinion of the belief itself, and to keep out of each other's life. But should either renege, they know that to the full re-opened old feud will be added resentment for having reneged. It is a feature that was common in societies given to feuding. The feud can be ended by mutual agreement and often this is put to the test by claim on the hospitality honour code also traditional to that kind of society. Often the hospitality will be effusively overdone - but it will not be over-extended! This is how Njálssaga ends, with the 3rd generation Flósi giving a feast for his traditional enemy presenting himself as a 'stranger' entitled to hospitality. I was just checking some of my claimed ancestors - it seems that our reconciliation with Clan Colquhoun took rather longer - from 1602 to 1744.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Jul 17, 2011 22:47:28 GMT -5
Feuds are terrible things .. whether between clans or tribes or families. Up in the hills of KY at the WV border, the legendary feud between the Hatfield and McCoy families cost a number of lives and great waves of heartache.
Let's look at this another way. How many people manage to move from fierce divorce differences and emotional turmoil to reconcile ... as friends .. or at least into a neutral situation with a child in common? It would definitely be the sensible thing to do but among people I know, it's rather rare. How could people work toward this ideal?
|
|
Erasmus
Moderatorz
Deep Thought Mod
"We do not take prisoners - we liberate them" - http://www.aeonbytegnosticradio.com
Posts: 2,489
|
Post by Erasmus on Jul 18, 2011 9:14:54 GMT -5
I don't consider that reconciliation implies being happy with the outcome though, just accepting it and ending hostilities. All it needs is a peace treaty where one side does not seek punitive retribution like happened to Germany after the first world war and the Russian zone after the second. Divorce settlements often are of that order where nobody is particularly happy about it but they settle for less than they wanted and go separate ways.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2011 6:02:45 GMT -5
I don't consider that reconciliation implies being happy with the outcome though, ... NOT quite, Erasmus. Certainly, what you wrote is true, in ONE of the meanings of the word. However, there ARE other meanings as you can read HERE.reconcile (ˈrɛkənˌsaɪl) — vb (usually foll by to ) 1. to make (oneself or another) no longer opposed; cause to acquiesce in something unpleasant: she reconciled herself to poverty 2. to become friendly with (someone) after estrangement or to re-establish friendly relations between (two or more people) 3. to settle (a quarrel or difference) 4. to make (two apparently conflicting things) compatible or consistent with each other 5. to reconsecrate (a desecrated church, etc) IMO, the second is the most appropriate. "to become friendly" most emphatically needs one to be MORE THAN HAPPY with the outcome. Prashna
|
|
Erasmus
Moderatorz
Deep Thought Mod
"We do not take prisoners - we liberate them" - http://www.aeonbytegnosticradio.com
Posts: 2,489
|
Post by Erasmus on Jul 22, 2011 12:24:56 GMT -5
Indeed, three can always be degrees of taking the sense of a word. I consider the third and first of your examples to be the most basic sense. Essentially they are the same but the first case is more of a figurative extension of the third, as if having a quarrel with an abstract situation. And for an excellent example of reconciliation, one murderer's life depends on it
|
|