Dude. Really. Cmon. Youre making a big deal out of something thats small.
If I were making a big deal out of something small, I would start using provocative language, ad hominem attacks, rude capitalisation. I would stop using terms like "I believe, I feel, I think, it may be that". If I were to make a very big deal out of it, I may, possibly, even point to my sig and explicitly say it was non-applicable for this post. But it is applicable.
You made a blanket statement that I disproved.
Without getting into accepted standards of proof, subjectivity and relativity and such, I stated an opinion which you seem to be taking issue with. You haven't disproved as far as I can see, and although I don't think it's likely that you'll disprove it, I would like to hear, in a detailed explanation, why you disagree.
People don't use any means available to accomplish any goal.
The word I used was "whatsoever" which is generally defined as something in the ballpark of " one or some or every or all without specification". I did not say "all people, use every means in every case to get what they want". I have not said this, which is why you telling me that "all people use every means in every case" is not true, reads to me as a non-sequitur.
What you describe (will commit any action or use any means to accomplish any goal that strikes their fancy)
This is not what I described
is a classic sociopath.
It is. It is not, however, what I described. I was talking about psychopaths. A term which I believe has fallen into disuse among respectable psychologists, but which is usually taken to mean a person who feels little empathy for other or who enjoys making others suffer.
Someone completely without restraint. For them the simple fact that they CAN do something means they are entitled to do it, should they wish to.
What a sociopath appears to be.
This is not the case for normal people (ie those without a serious psychological disorder).
While I don't agree with this, it isn't relevant to what I said, so I won't comment upon it.
However according to your logic (that people always use every available method to accomplish getting what they want)
That is almost, but not quite, exactly what I did not say.
Ive just described using all things in my power (simply taking it even though it doesn't belong to me and Ive no money to purchase it, and beating up the rightful owner when he tries to stop me) to get what I want (in this case a delicious klondike bar).
Which is cool, but not relevant.
Are you seeing the problem now?
Yes. You appear not to understand the distinction between [ANY] as found in most dictionaries and [ALL] as found in most dictionaries.
You can tell by how society generally functions and doesn't revert to state of nature. (which is kinda what youre talking about, but not really applicable if youre talking about any group of humans that exist as a society and not as individual animals beating each other with rocks for survivial.)
The existence of society is to my mind indicative of the fact the people are bastards, psychopaths, disgusting savage animals - but ones who have the rationality to agree not to kill each other because they understand that most of us can dish out much more than we can take.
People use seduction, lies, fear, suspicion etc to gain advantages. They make people feel bad, sometimes for personal gain, sometimes for nothing more than the pleasure of seeing a person cry. I think most of us are like that. Maybe you don't, do you?
Which is why I think that gaining power won't fundamentally change a person, it will simply reveal who s/he really is.
I think Harry is a person who genuinely cares about people, which is why I would not object to his acquire great power, and trust him to use it with great responsibility.
