No. Just presenting an alternative view. I didn't think it mattered where your impressions-stated-as-fact came from, since I was sure you took the atbreastude that your views are always subject to revision based on new information that could be acquired at any time. I'll be darned! Exactly what I was thinking. Which is also why I tend to refer to such limited data observations as speculation or impression.
identified in what you quoted below I don't. Whatever gave you that impression? But it is different from yours.
No. Just remembering that this is one of those terms that you feel should be used differently from the way that professional lexicographers say it is used, so to avoid confusion I was pointing out that I was using the term in the way described in dictionaries rather than the way that meets your approval. Just trying to keep communication clear and avoid confusion that can sometimes exist if there are different understandings of the meaning of a word.
Not needed Nope not needed Your fourth point is valid. For the first three, imagine a chemist who says "I was able to get xyz reaction without the presence of water" All you have to do to disprove that is show that there was water present in the experiment in which he created the xyz reaction. No need for quantifiers, thresholds, and measures, since his claim to have been water-free was absolute.
But on to your valid point. Maybe a definition of soft skills is needed.
You initially mentioned that you see them as being "i) docile, ii) obedient, iii) pbuttive, iv) butt-kissing, v) kissing-up...that sort of thing." Frankly, I don't see any skill in any of those things--just atbreastude. I identified some examples of real "soft skills" as including communication skills (written, one-on-one, and presentation), teamwork, etc.
Maybe that's where our different views of this are coming from. If you are reverting to your original definition of "soft skills", then I would certainly agree that Rickover didn't have any! But it is hard to argue that he did not have communication skills.
This did not show any evidence of soft skills. Nor does it show any evidence of his athletic or musical skills. I don't draw any conclusion from this sentence's lack of evidence of any of those skills.
Again, if you are going back to your original definition of soft skills (which I would describe as compliant atbreastudes), this sentence does indicate the lack of such atbreastudes.
That's an amazing question. Do you not consider salesmanship a soft skill? I consider it a very hard skill to master, but always considered it about the ultimate in soft skills.
Sounds like we are back to that atbreastudes versus skills split.
So you think that Saddam Hussein almost certainly had some soft skills, but you could not agree that Rickover had any soft skills without knowing his exact actions and reactions?
But what is the "it" that you think goes beyond what most people have?
-- Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
