From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #338 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume99/338 Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------" To: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se Reply-To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se ------------------------------ Content-Type: text/plain blakes7-d Digest Volume 99 : Issue 338 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] optimism and pessimism Re: [B7L] Re: Avon ATA [B7L] blakes7-d Digest V99 #337 [B7L] list info Re: [B7L] optimism and pessimism [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #337 [B7L] Re: Tarrant's Uniform Re: [B7L] Realities of combat Re: [B7L] optimism and pessimism Re: [B7L] Realities of combat ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 05:02:01 PST From: "Rob Clother" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] optimism and pessimism Message-ID: <19991204130201.51472.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Me/Mistral: >>(1) Optimists are more likely to succeed than pessimists. [Alison] >>(2) Pessimists are more likely to be proved right than optimists >>[Mistral's study] -- because pessimism is, very often, a self- >>fulfilling prophesy. >> >>There's no contradiction at all between the statements. In fact, they are >>almost different ways of saying the same thing. > >Except that you've completely twisted what I >said. The study wasn't about optimism/pessimism as self-fufilling >prophecy, because it wasn't about *response* to the environment, >only the *perception* of it. But that's the point I'm making -- perception drives response. This is one of the things that came out so strongly in the Ray Mears' Extreme Survival series. The one common thread in all of the success stories was the attitude of the survivors. Those who survived simply never gave up hope. Of course, that was no guarantee of survival, but no one had a chance without it. >Pessimism and defeatism are by no means the same thing. They >occur together with what I suspect is roughly the same frequency >as optimism and foolhardiness. I cannot count the number of times >I've watched optimists precipitate major life disasters because they >refused to consider the possible negative consequences of their >actions. Pessimists are, in my experience at least, far more likely >to consider *all* possible outcomes, good and bad. Good point! There's optimism and there's optimism. There's the sort of optimism where one believes in oneself and refuses to allow setbacks to get in the way of that dream job, or that personal best athletic achievement (or staying alive up a mountain). And there's the reckless attitude, where someone just assumes that nothing will ever go wrong, and doesn't bother to make any kind of contingency plan. The most extreme example of that is a couple of guys I knew two or three years back, who went up a mountain in the Alps towards the end of the season, after a good few weeks of freezing and thawing. They were experienced mountaineers, who really should have known better -- rather unsurprisingly, they were caught in an avalanche and killed. Of course, most of us don't go to those kinds of extremes, but as you say, there are parallels in daily life. And equally, there's pessimism and there's pessimism. You might want to be a little more descriptive, and say there's a difference between pessimism and defeatism, just as there's a difference between optimism and foolhardiness. But, to be honest, I'd have to say that the lines separating these qualities can become precariously thin at times. >Sometimes pessimists fight harder to succeed because they know it's going >to take that sort of effort if there's to be a chance to succeed at all. >As in Avon's 'If they're going to kill us, let us at least try and >make it difficult for them'. Do you think that people with pessimist tendencies are more likely to identify with Avon than Blake, and vice versa? I mean, I am one of life's optimists (with all the advantages and disadvantages that entails), and I've always identified with Blake. Another classic Blake/Avon moment that springs to mind is at the start of "Duel" -- when he's cornered, Blake pulls out the stops and decides to ram Travis. Avon is against the idea, but concedes that he can think of no better strategy. And I'm sitting there, totally gunning for Blake. I even have a bit of a Blake attitude when I play football or squash. I go after balls that sensible people wouldn't even bother to look at -- and every now and again, I get a point out of it. Which is the argument Blake would use to justify the same behaviour, on the Liberator or on the squash court! >You could say it was Blake's optimism that got Gan killed. Hey, no one's perfect!!! ;-) -- Rob ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 08:31:40 EST From: Bizarro7@aol.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Avon ATA Message-ID: <0.42684d55.257a71bc@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/04/1999 12:31:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, avona@jps.net writes: > I thought that there was a lively pace to the book, and > I've forgiven it the horrid astronomy errors, having be maybe four feet > away from Paul as he smiled and said in a slightly enbarrassed way that > the editor's wouldn't let him alter the errors (having looked up the > facts for his *final* draft), saying they thought it was good enough, > set up the proofs. He said they told him the fans wouldn't notice > (showing they know nothing about SF fans!). >> How astonishingly this story has changed over the past 10 years. Back then, the fans who were closely involved in assisting Paul with the writing and production of this book complained that they tried to get Paul to allow the thing to be edited, and that PAUL threw out virtually all suggested corrections and edits. Apparently, a rewrite of sorts has occurred, but it wasn't in the manuscript... Leah ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 10:57:14 -0800 From: "Kinkade, Carol A" To: "'blakes7@lysator.liu.se'" Subject: [B7L] blakes7-d Digest V99 #337 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I apologize for sending this message to the list, but I'm not where I can access the internet to find Calle's personal mail address. I'm hoping that by putting the word "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the subject line, lysator will throw it out to Calle. If it hits the list, I apologize. Calle, please unsub me from the list. I have tried but keep getting a message saying "you cannot be unsubscribed because you are not subscribed" Thank you -----Original Message----- From: carol.a.kinkade@boeing.com [SMTP: carol.kinkade@west.nasa.gov] Sent: Saturday, December 04, 1999 5:50 AM To: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE -----Original Message----- From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se [SMTP:blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se] Sent: Saturday, December 04, 1999 3:40 AM To: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #337 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 20:55:52 +0000 (GMT) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: [B7L] list info Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII If you're a list member and you can't remember how to unsub, remember that I always have the details on my web site http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 Just look under 'mailing lists'. I notice the hit rate on the site's top page has jumped from 70 to 100 per day. While I'd like to think it's because the recent redesign has made it all far more fantastic, I suspect that people can't resist hitting refresh to see which random picture comes up next! Judith -- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 - Fanzines for Blake's 7, B7 Filk songs, pictures, news, Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth Thomas, etc. (also non-Blake's 7 zines at http://www.nas.com/~lknight ) Redemption '01 23-25 Feb 2001 http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 21:54:32 -0000 From: "Andrew Ellis" To: Subject: Re: [B7L] optimism and pessimism Message-ID: <007601bf3ea2$8dd788c0$85258cd4@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Rob said lots of stuff, and .... > >Do you think that people with pessimist tendencies are more likely to >identify with Avon than Blake, and vice versa? I mean, I am one of life's >optimists (with all the advantages and disadvantages that entails), and I've >always identified with Blake. Another classic Blake/Avon moment that >springs to mind is at the start of "Duel" -- when he's cornered, Blake pulls >out the stops and decides to ram Travis. Avon is against the idea, but >concedes that he can think of no better strategy. And I'm sitting there, >totally gunning for Blake. I even have a bit of a Blake attitude when I >play football or squash. I go after balls that sensible people wouldn't >even bother to look at -- and every now and again, I get a point out of it. >Which is the argument Blake would use to justify the same behaviour, on the >Liberator or on the squash court! > An ability to take calculated risks does not necessarily equate to an optimistic tendency (and vice versa). Similarly, a pessimist attitude does not always make you dysfunctional under pressure. Perhaps what that particular scene in Duel illustrates is another facet of personality, that of lateral thinking. The logical thing to do in a battle is to absorb any hits on target with your force wall, and make all of your shots count. Avon would be thinking along those lines, perhaps (over) optimistically. Jenna is an excellent pilot, the Liberator is the best ship. When it becomes apparent that that tactic will not work, Blake's distance from the technology and the mechanics of how it all works and his ability for lateral thinking allows him to come up with a novel solution. Avon on the other hand was probably going through the logical solutions along the lines of minimise our damage / energy expenditure, maximise theirs, and so did not have an alternative to offer. He did however recognise the potential of Blake's idea, and optimistically supported it (in Avon's own abrasive style). Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 20:31:04 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #337 Message-ID: <3849DC79.5440@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > We do seem to agree, however, that even when you hit your target, > > you can't count on them dying instantly. > > Blake lives! I always knew it. That guy on the floor isn't dead, just > unconscious. Nobody even checked his pulse. > > Judith Why not? Get him to a hospital fast enough and he'd be alive even with today's medicine, given that the bullets don't hit bones and bounce around inside. Avona ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 21:18:01 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: Tarrant's Uniform Message-ID: <3849E77A.62ED@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Unless of course he ended up in the company of the Black Friday > Afternoon Kill All Fed Scum Popular Peoples Mad-Eyed Revolutionary Front, > but that's just one of the risks he'd have to take. > > Neil Well, you do sort of wonder about him wearing it to board the Liberator. But my guess is he noticed the lifepods go or something. After all, going there he was going into the Mad-eyed Revolutionary Front, unless he knew they'd bailed. --Avona ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 09:54:13 -0000 From: "Kin Ming Looi" To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Realities of combat Message-ID: <005201bf3f06$e58956c0$0101a8c0@leviathan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Iain Coleman Sent: 02 December 1999 10:03 > It's my understanding that the SAS doctrine is to shoot the target twice, > and then evaluate the situation. I presume they know what they're doing. However, as I recall, the "double-tap" technique is used for room clearance in hostage situations where basically the SAS troopers burst into a room potentially packed with terrorists and hostages so the aim is to put two bullets into the head of the first terrorist and move on to the next target as soon as possible until the room is clear. Special Forces troops spend huge amounts of their time constantly training so they do have the reflexes to identify and eliminate the right targets with the sort of speed required. By contrast, standard infantry approaches to room clearance involve grenades and bursts of automatic fire into the room when there is no concern about hostages. So the question is whether that sort of skill can be realistically expected from the B7 characters - With the possible exceptions of Dayna and Soolin, I'd argue no. Even there, I still don't get the same impression of nigh-on constant training. Ming. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 03:05:23 -0800 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] optimism and pessimism Message-ID: <384A46F1.787F8D4E@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Rob Clother wrote: > Me/Mistral: > > >>(1) Optimists are more likely to succeed than pessimists. [Alison] > >>(2) Pessimists are more likely to be proved right than optimists > >>[Mistral's study] -- because pessimism is, very often, a self- > >>fulfilling prophesy. > >> > >>There's no contradiction at all between the statements. In fact, they are > >>almost different ways of saying the same thing. > > > >Except that you've completely twisted what I > >said. The study wasn't about optimism/pessimism as self-fufilling > >prophecy, because it wasn't about *response* to the environment, > >only the *perception* of it. > > But that's the point I'm making -- perception drives response. Agreed that perception is a major (but not the only) factor. I did feel that your statement (2) above obscured the point of my comment re the study. The study showed that the perceptions of the pessimist tend to be more accurate *independent of or before* any response that is made. [snip] > Good point! There's optimism and there's optimism. There's the sort of > optimism where one believes in oneself and refuses to allow setbacks to get > in the way of that dream job, or that personal best athletic achievement (or > staying alive up a mountain). Is that really optimism? I think of that as self-confidence. [snip] > Of course, most of us don't go to those kinds of extremes, but as you say, > there are parallels in daily life. And equally, there's pessimism and > there's pessimism. You might want to be a little more descriptive, and say > there's a difference between pessimism and defeatism, just as there's a > difference between optimism and foolhardiness. But, to be honest, I'd have > to say that the lines separating these qualities can become precariously > thin at times. Agreed. > Do you think that people with pessimist tendencies are more likely to > identify with Avon than Blake, and vice versa? An interesting question :) After some thought, I'd guess there would be some statistical correspondence, but only because I'm convinced that traits tend to run in clusters. I don't think it's the dividing line; I see the dividing line as more of an independence/ connectedness issue, with possibly a bit of reason vs. sentiment thrown in for good measure. > I mean, I am one of life's > optimists (with all the advantages and disadvantages that entails), and I've > always identified with Blake. Another classic Blake/Avon moment that > springs to mind is at the start of "Duel" -- when he's cornered, Blake pulls > out the stops and decides to ram Travis. Avon is against the idea, but > concedes that he can think of no better strategy. A wonderful scene. I don't entirely agree that Avon's against the idea; more that he's caught off guard by it. The issues are 1) has Blake considered everything that can go wrong, and 2) does Avon get a choice in the matter. To me that speaks of independence and reason (I can see how an optimist might see it as negativism, though.) > And I'm sitting there, > totally gunning for Blake. I even have a bit of a Blake attitude when I > play football or squash. I go after balls that sensible people wouldn't > even bother to look at -- and every now and again, I get a point out of it. > Which is the argument Blake would use to justify the same behaviour, on the > Liberator or on the squash court! I sincerely commend you. Let me just point out, however, that in life and death situations, succeeding 'every now and again' just isn't good enough ;-) I think I'd amend your original statements to read: (1) Optimists are more likely to succeed than pessimists *against overwhelming odds*, because they ignore the odds, knowing there's always a chance, however slim. (2) Pessimists are more likely to be proved right than optimists because they're not blinded to reality by wishful thinking. So, if you want hope, ask an optimist. If you want the truth, ask a pessimist ;-) Grins, Mistral -- "Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!" --Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 17:49:57 -0000 From: "Deborah Day" To: "blakes7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Realities of combat Message-ID: <007201bf3f49$25f46780$0a88bc3e@oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Blake lives! I always knew it. That guy on the floor isn't dead, just >unconscious. Nobody even checked his pulse. I think after nearly twenty years you could safely say he is dead now. Debbie. -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #338 **************************************