12 ms·
I think it's fair to have principles and still have an interesting an active life. The best example of this would have to be, well, Ben Franklin.
by mindtricks 1y ago
I think it's fair to have principles and still have an interesting an active life. The best example of this would have to be, well, Ben Franklin.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- lazide 1y agoI find the list hilarious, because Ben Franklin was a notorious player, and his time in France (as American ambassador) was legendary - if documented today, it would make the Wolf of Wallstreet jealous. In modern parlance, ‘coke and hookers’ galore. He also, by all accounts, was instrumental in getting France to support the US war of independence, without which the war would likely have gone an entirely different way. Not to say he treated anyone badly - by all accounts, all participants enjoyed themselves immensely. But don’t take these pronouncements as documentations of fact, but rather playing to an audience. He was also one of the major publishers and propagandists in early America, and his audience was profoundly conservative (often in the puritan sense), rural, and poor. It’s how he made one of his first fortunes [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_Richard%27s_Almanack https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_Richard%27s_Almanack]. He probably did follow some of them, when it suited him, but clearly was never hesitant to let them get in the way of a good time either. Taking it too literally is like taking one of those popular business books too literally.
- MichaelZuo 1y agoCan you link the source for these claims? Considering he didn’t have any embassy bureaucracy beyond a few staff helping him, and that any reply from washington would be many weeks away… it seems extremely unlikely he would have had much free time at all in Paris.
- lazide 1y agowhich part? your timelines seem pretty off if you think ‘weeks’ was a remotely possible timeline at the time either. There was no electronic communication of any sort (electricity was barely understood at the time), and best case transit time was around 6 weeks each way, often 8-12 if possible at all. It was also highly seasonal, and still very dangerous. So the absolute fastest turn around time was 12 weeks/3 months, and more realistically 4-6 months. With some decent odds that one of the legs of the trip might sink, losing all hands. It’s why a literal founding father (and one of the most influential ones) was the ambassador. No one else could be trusted. [https://www.history.com/articles/benjamin-franklin-france https://www.history.com/articles/benjamin-franklin-france]
- MichaelZuo 1y agoAre you confused about what “many weeks” means? it means >>few weeks
- lazide 1y agoHow does that work out 6 months in on your ‘many weeks’ work estimate?
- MichaelZuo 1y agoHuh? Do you not believe 20 to 30 weeks is >>few weeks?
- lazide 1y agoI have never seen (or used) ‘few’ in the description of something when there was 20 of something. Technically, a year could also count if you said >> few seconds, but no one will take you seriously if you do either.
- MichaelZuo 1y agoYou seem very confused… “many weeks” was the exact quote. “few” was only brought up after the bizarre reply as part of the explanation in “>>few weeks”. And yes “many weeks” easily covers the range of 20 to 30 weeks.
- lazide 1y agoNope. Just pointing out it’s the wrong scale, and providing context of the right scale. Which is months. Many months.
- MichaelZuo 1y agoThis doesn’t even make sense. Why don’t you accept it is often used? You can search older HN comments and see hundreds upon hundreds of instances of “many weeks” and so on…