"It's not the strong who survive... It's the survivors who are strong."

[Minh]

What's the meaning of this? I find it contradicting.

[Senpai]

Many possible interpretation, my 50 cents are on:

-Is surviving that defines strenght, no such thing as intrinsic stenght

-By the act of surviving you become strong

-Gebura posing as edgy philosopher saying that A is not B, but B is A!

Mostly for option C because Gebura ain't Binah

[Minh]

Originally posted by Senpai:

Many possible interpretation, my 50 cents are on:

-Is surviving that defines strenght, no such thing as intrinsic stenght

-By the act of surviving you become strong

-Gebura posing as edgy philosopher saying that A is not B, but B is A!

Mostly for option C because Gebura ain't Binah

1st one makes sense. Sentence 1's "strong" means intrinsic strength. Sentence 2's "strong" means strength, experience, & skill.

2nd doesn't help. If you become strong after surviving, you can survive again by being strong. That contradicts sentence 1.

I like 3rd one. She wants to say a confusing quote that makes sense by using another interpretation so it sounds cool.

[SmallGespenst]

I feel like it's basically just saying "Being strong isn't going to help you survive, but the process of surviving will make you strong" there's no contradiction, being made stronger by surviving doesn't guarantee further survival, it's just a testament to what you've already survived. For example, Gerb survived growing up in the Backstreets and a hell of a lot as a fixer/Color, but being strong didn't let her survive Garion.

[ReflexRune]

I think the simplest way to interpret this is, "The strong don't always survive, but those who survive are definitely strong."

[Senpai]

As already pretty much pointed out let's just dumb it down to
-Surviving the red noon ordeal is what will make you "strong"
-This gives little to no guarantee on your future performance against the yellow noon ordeal

[Minh]

Originally posted by SmallGespenst:

I feel like it's basically just saying "Being strong isn't going to help you survive, but the process of surviving will make you strong" there's no contradiction, being made stronger by surviving doesn't guarantee further survival, it's just a testament to what you've already survived. For example, Gerb survived growing up in the Backstreets and a hell of a lot as a fixer/Color, but being strong didn't let her survive Garion.

I get it. Surviving against something proves that you're strong against it. It doesn't mean that you're strong against everything.

[Minh]

Originally posted by ReflexRune:

I think the simplest way to interpret this is, "The strong don't always survive, but those who survive are definitely strong."

"You're strong for surviving against a weaker enemy. That doesn't mean you'll survive against a stronger enemy."

[Coin]

Isn't it obvious. Survival is the proof of strength, and not matter how strong someone is, if they didn't make it, they weren't strong enough in the end.

Originally posted by Minh:

I get it. Surviving against something proves that you're strong against it. It doesn't mean that you're strong against everything.

"Remind yourself that overconfidence is a slow and insidious killer"

[dytong]

I thought it was "The survivor is the strongest since everyone else is dead," spoken moments after a GS:H.

[Lovise]

eh, in terms of survival... I would say that most biologists would agree that it is defined in term of fitness i.e. "survival of the fittest" - Darwin

[Ciecieji]

It's a correlation not causation issue.

Strength is like the steam achievement badge you get for surviving, you don't complete the achievement by getting the achievement badge, you got the achievement badge because you completed the achievement.

To give another correlation not causation example.

Imagine that there's 50 people who are captured, 5 of whom are chosen by lottery to go to a gym where they can workout to receive food, the left are locked into a closet to starve. The people who survive that situation did not survive because they were strong, they became strong because they survived (that very bizarre and convoluted circumstance).

The point they are making is anyone who doesn't die is forged by the circumstance they are collectively in to become stronger.

[Minh]

Originally posted by Ciecieji:

It's a correlation not causation issue.

Strength is like the steam achievement badge you get for surviving, you don't complete the achievement by getting the achievement badge, you got the achievement badge because you completed the achievement.

To give another correlation not causation example.

Imagine that there's 50 people who are captured, 5 of whom are chosen by lottery to go to a gym where they can workout to receive food, the left are locked into a closet to starve. The people who survive that situation did not survive because they were strong, they became strong because they survived (that very bizarre and convoluted circumstance).

The point they are making is anyone who doesn't die is forged by the circumstance they are collectively in to become stronger.

You get the Steam achievement badge for completing the achievement, yes, but that badge proves that you can complete the achievement again. That contradicts sentence 1.

The people who survive became strong, yes, but that means they can survive again with that strength. That contradicts sentence 1.

Solutions:
1) Words "strong" in 2 sentences have different meanings. 1st "strong" means intrinsic strength. 2nd "strong" means strength, experience, & skill.

2) Words "survive" & "survivors" have different meanings. Word "survivors" means if you survive A, it proves you're strong against A. Word "survive" means if you have strength to survive A, it doesn't mean you'll survive against B.

[Minh]

Originally posted by Coin:

Isn't it obvious. Survival is the proof of strength, and not matter how strong someone is, if they didn't make it, they weren't strong enough in the end.

Originally posted by Minh:

I get it. Surviving against something proves that you're strong against it. It doesn't mean that you're strong against everything.

"Remind yourself that overconfidence is a slow and insidious killer"

Yes. What you said there is sentence 2. Sentence 2 makes sense but sentence 1 contradicts it. Solution to this is changing the meaning of certain words so they don't contradict.

[Bishop]

I think its something akin "history is written by the winners" lines. In the end its not really the strongest (physically, mentally or whatever else) who survive but the ones who can quickly adapt to changes necessary.

[Coin]

Originally posted by Minh:

Originally posted by Coin:

Isn't it obvious. Survival is the proof of strength, and not matter how strong someone is, if they didn't make it, they weren't strong enough in the end.



"Remind yourself that overconfidence is a slow and insidious killer"

Yes. What you said there is sentence 2. Sentence 2 makes sense but sentence 1 contradicts it. Solution to this is changing the meaning of certain words so they don't contradict.

Not only do i not think that they contradict each other, i think those sentences work well together.