OT: Humility as a \'virtue.\' (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Saturday, October 23, 2010, 18:32 (5144 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

I would argue that in the situation of a leader eating with his troops, it displays not only a sharp insight into human relationships, but also humility and wisdom. Yes, to an extent it was self serving, but his troops also got something out of it in the form of moral. As long as he was genuine in his efforts, I can see no fault with what he did.-He was genuine from the vantage that he had fought side by side with them many times, and had cultivated a loyalty to him instead of the Roman state. (Rome's fatal flaw was no formal system of constitutional acculturation--the soldiers were never formally tied to the state, but to the generals that recruited them.) -He was ultimately going to be using them as means to an end. His goal was to have them tied to him in heart and spirit--because the act of crossing the Rubicon was a very grave act. His actual feelings towards his men is something lost to time--we can never know that. But knowing what I know of ancient Rome and Caesar--he was NOT going to face trial. His men would have allowed him to do whatever he wanted, so he wasn't pressed by soldiers to march on Rome. He was using his men as a tool to further his own ends. What his troops got out of it--was the promise of parcels of land given to them by the state to become agrarians.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"