Re: Agreed-upon character traits
Posted: Sat Aug 20, 2005 2:34 am
Greetings Amyntoros,> I'm bringing this up because as it stands right now you are building an image of Alexander in which we both agree (and probably Sikander too) but have no idea if others support this. I mean, it could be that no one has commented simply because they agree, but without more feedback, how will you know? 
I'm bringing this up because as it stands right now you are building an image of Alexander in which we both agree (and probably Sikander too) but have no idea if others support this. I mean, it could be that no one has commented simply because they agree, but without more feedback, how will you know? I'm bringing this up because as it stands right now you are building an image of Alexander in which we both agree (and probably Sikander too) but have no idea if others support this. I mean, it could be that no one has commented simply because they agree, but without more feedback, how will you know? :-)I agree to a point with the "portrait", though there *are* some areas I would probably question or view differently. I would also be inclined to approach it from the angle that, as in childhood, although a core personality would exist, time, events and human interaction with others, both positive and negative, could affect said traits. Humans are not born with a complete set of character traits intact; some are developed or enhanced as they experience life, others diminish as they grow. The core remains but often expresses itself differently through age; also, the core personality can morph into something entirely different- positive or negative- depending on circumstances. On the other hand, there are probably times I have been taught too well to argue both sides (without the need to necessarily believe in either one completely) (smiling)There are some general characteristics we can label Alexander with, but it is more difficult for me to try to settle a specifc set of traits on him, as I see him changing over the years. Some things would remain, such as ambition, fearlessness (though even that may have softened with age), charisma, etc
but others would change, morphed or transformed to be expressed in different ways, possibly even becoming the opposite of what was. For example, a person who is forgiving and generous by nature can become hardened and bitter if betrayed by his own beliefs, friends or expectations of others. I suppose the question might be, how much of who and what we are is inherent and how much is created as we experience life? And of course, I tend to see the traits attributed to Alexander in so many others who achieve less that I am inclined to attribute some of his success to the fact that he was born into the right family at the right time. A peasant with his same character traits, in that time and place, would not have achieved things to the same degree. An Alexander who did not acquire the throne until a middle-aged man might well have been completely different, since traits would have had to epxress themselves differently, and the end product might be completely different from the
I'm bringing this up because as it stands right now you are building an image of Alexander in which we both agree (and probably Sikander too) but have no idea if others support this. I mean, it could be that no one has commented simply because they agree, but without more feedback, how will you know? I'm bringing this up because as it stands right now you are building an image of Alexander in which we both agree (and probably Sikander too) but have no idea if others support this. I mean, it could be that no one has commented simply because they agree, but without more feedback, how will you know? :-)I agree to a point with the "portrait", though there *are* some areas I would probably question or view differently. I would also be inclined to approach it from the angle that, as in childhood, although a core personality would exist, time, events and human interaction with others, both positive and negative, could affect said traits. Humans are not born with a complete set of character traits intact; some are developed or enhanced as they experience life, others diminish as they grow. The core remains but often expresses itself differently through age; also, the core personality can morph into something entirely different- positive or negative- depending on circumstances. On the other hand, there are probably times I have been taught too well to argue both sides (without the need to necessarily believe in either one completely) (smiling)There are some general characteristics we can label Alexander with, but it is more difficult for me to try to settle a specifc set of traits on him, as I see him changing over the years. Some things would remain, such as ambition, fearlessness (though even that may have softened with age), charisma, etcbut others would change, morphed or transformed to be expressed in different ways, possibly even becoming the opposite of what was. For example, a person who is forgiving and generous by nature can become hardened and bitter if betrayed by his own beliefs, friends or expectations of others. I suppose the question might be, how much of who and what we are is inherent and how much is created as we experience life? And of course, I tend to see the traits attributed to Alexander in so many others who achieve less that I am inclined to attribute some of his success to the fact that he was born into the right family at the right time. A peasant with his same character traits, in that time and place, would not have achieved things to the same degree. An Alexander who did not acquire the throne until a middle-aged man might well have been completely different, since traits would have had to epxress themselves differently, and the end product might be completely different from the