Turning the other cheek IS a good idea: de-escalation through a show of restraint°. APPEASEMENT is none of that. The distinction is: in the first case, you are holding back the war inside your self°; in the second case, you are inflaming the war inside your opponent°°. The two get confused because the ratio between them trends similarly (°/°°); but only the first case decreases overall hostility (°+°°).
TL;DR: Controlling yourself helps. Buying off hostility, doesn't.
° controlled slapped <-> weak appeaser
°° less inflamed slapper <-> more inflamed appeased
Turning the other cheek IS a good idea: de-escalation through a show of restraint°. APPEASEMENT is none of that. The distinction is: in the first case, you are holding back the war inside your self°; in the second case, you are inflaming the war inside your opponent°°. The two get confused because the ratio between them trends similarly (°/°°); but only the first case decreases overall hostility (°+°°).
TL;DR: Controlling yourself helps. Buying off hostility, doesn't.
° controlled slapped <-> weak appeaser
°° neutral slapper <-> inflamed appeased
Turning the other cheek IS a good idea: de-escalation through a show of restraint°. APPEASEMENT is none of that. The distinction is: in the first case, you are holding back the war inside your self°; in the second case, you are inflaming the war inside your opponent°°. The two get confused because the ratio between them trends similarly (°/°°); but only the first case decreases overall hostility (°+°°).
° controlled slapped <-> weak appeaser
°° neutral slapper <-> inflamed appeased
Turning the other cheek IS a good idea: de-escalation through a show of restraint°. APPEASEMENT is none of that. The distinction is: in the first case, you are holding back the war inside your self°; in the second case, you are inflaming the war inside your opponent°°. The two get confused because the ratio between them trends similarly (°/°°); but only the first case decreases overall hostility (°+°°).
° controlled slapped / weak appeaser
°° neutral slapper / inflamed appeased
Turning the other cheek IS a good idea: de-escalation through a show of restraint°. APPEASEMENT is none of that. The distinction is: in the first case, you are holding back the war inside your self°; in the second case, you are inflaming the war inside your opponent°°. The two get confused because the ratio between them trends similarly (°/°°); but only the first decreases overall hostility (°+°°).
° controlled slapped / weak appeaser
°° neutral slapper / inflamed appeased
Turning the other cheek IS a good idea: de-escalation through a show of restraint. APPEASEMENT is none of that. The distinction is: in the first case, you are holding back the war inside your self; in the second case, you are inflaming the war inside your opponent. They get confused because the ratio between the two trends similarly; but only the first decreases overall hostility.
Turning the other cheek IS a good idea: de-escalation through a show of restraint. APPEASEMENT is none of that. The distinction is: in the first case, you are holding back the war inside your self; in the second case, you are inflaming the war inside your opponent. They get confused because the ratio between them looks similar; but only the first decreases iverall hostility.
Turning the other cheek IS a good idea: de-escalation through a show of restraint. APPEASEMENT is none of that. The distinction is: in the first case, you are holding back the war inside your self; in the second case, you are inflaming the war inside your opponent.
Turning the other cheek IS a good idea: de-escalation through a show of restraint. APPEASEMENT is none of that. The distinction is: in the first case, you are holding back the war inside your self; in the second case, you are feeding the war inside your opponent.
Turning the other cheek IS a good idea: de-escalation through a show of restraint. APPEASEMENT is none of that.