Some people dont ever change...

[daybrown]

Epictetus:"When we see a man who inclines to two sides, we say he's not a Jew, but he acts like one."

Then, regarding philosophers:"But some'll say,Where's this guy get the arrogance he displays and these supercilious looks? I havent yet so much gravity as befits a philosopher; for I dont yet feel confidence in what I've learned and what I've assented to: I still fear my own weakness. Let me get confidence and, you'll see a look such as I should and an attitude such as I should have: then I'll show you the statue, when it is perfected, when it is polished. What do you expect? A supercilious countenance? Does the Zeus at Olympia lift up his brow? No, his look is fixed as becomes him who is ready to say Irrevocable is my word and shall not fail.

Such I'll show myself- faithful, modest, noble, free from perturbation. What? immortal too, exempt from old age, and from sickness? No, but dying as becomes a god, sickening as becomes a god. This power I possess; this I can do. But the rest I dont have, nor can I do. I'll show the nerves of a philosopher- What nerves're these? A desire never disappointed, an aversion which never falls on that which it'd avoid, a proper pursuit, a diligent purpose, an assent which isnt rash. These you'll see."

[David Quinn]

Those who never change are either the wisest of the wise or the dullest of the dull.

-

[xerox]

...

[sapincher]

it's very important to keep your thoughts limited to powerful words on a couple of lines because that is what every great quotation sounds like.

[xerox]

...

[daybrown]

Well, if the Jews are still of two minds, are the barbarians still... barbarian?

[Perishable]

Those who never change are either the wisest of the wise or the dullest of the dull.

Can this be relevant to those who do change?
what if the change is from wise to dull...
Or an addition of being wise you add dull.
Or would that not have been wise? And that one fatal desicion creates you to not be wise at all?

Therefore making a change.

But. If deciding on that desicion makes you dull, and you are wise by not letting that change affect you.
Then you do not change.
Is it only a course of added events?

[sue hindmarsh]

Perishable wrote:

David Quinn wrote:Those who never change are either the wisest of the wise or the dullest of the dull.

Can this be relevant to those who do change?

You wrote your post in reply to the above sentence; so you do have some idea of what the two terms “wise” and “dull” refer to. This means you are capable of answering your own question about “those who do change”. But for some reason you posture blindness to its relevance. That is difficult to understand – as is the rest of your post. For below you wish to impose on your concept of wisdom all manner of absurdities. It leaves me to believe that your concept of wisdom must be very much removed from any definition I am aware of.

what if the change is from wise to dull...
Or an addition of being wise you add dull.
Or would that not have been wise? And that one fatal desicion creates you to not be wise at all?

Therefore making a change.

But. If deciding on that desicion makes you dull, and you are wise by not letting that change affect you.
Then you do not change.
Is it only a course of added events?

To make clear what you want from your post, please define the two concepts wise and dull, as well as make clear your ideas on how they relate to one another.

[Carl G]

I suspect the poster Perishable has a short shelf life, and may have already moved on.

[Perishable]

It leaves me to believe that your concept of wisdom must be very much removed from any definition I am aware of

I was thinking very complicated at the time, it seems my mind traveled to another realm while I wrote that. I was in a rush with the post, there fore complicating my thoughts.

(Is that good enough of an excuse?)