Active Now

Malizz
Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » What does "fighting fire with fire" do? Why are we told that's the only way you can fight it?

What does "fighting fire with fire" do? Why are we told that's the only way you can fight it?

The dumb don is a massive CONFLAGRATION. What person can possibly match his degree of DEVASTATION DESTRUCTION DEVOLUTION DESPERATION DEVILTRY DEPRECATION DENIGRATION DESECRATION?

Posted - February 19, 2020

Responses


  • 6023
    The phrase fight fire with fire is derived from a literal fire-fighting practice that was popular in the United States during pioneer times. On the frontier, fire fighters were poorly-equipped volunteers. When a prairie fire threatened a new town or a homestead, the pioneers often set a smaller, controlled fire in front of the advancing wildfire. The hope was that the small fire would consume the fuel that the wildfire needed, forcing it to burn itself out. 

    A related phrase, when referring to politics, would be "who lives by the sword, dies by the sword".

    Either one refers to using similar tactics against someone, that they commonly use against others.

    But you don't have to "fight fire with fire".
    There's also the phrases to "douse" someone's plans or "throw water on" their plans.


      February 19, 2020 7:40 AM MST
    1

  • 113301
    Once again Walt you came through bigly for me. Thanks a bunch. It's good to understand the derivation of things. So they would set a small fire hoping that it would "satisfy" the big fire so to speak. I understand the sword reference but that fire thing didn't make any sense. Now it does. Oh how about "raining on my parade"? There are people who specialize in parade raining. Why I don't know. Do you?
      February 19, 2020 7:48 AM MST
    0

  • 6023
    I've been accused of being a parade rainer.  (is that even a term?  lol)
    But I prefer to think of it as being a "devil's advocate", as I tend to view both sides of an issue.
    It can be a good thing to bring up concerns about a proposed change/policy/idea ... unless they just want a "yes man" and don't want to consider any ramifications of the change.
      February 19, 2020 7:54 AM MST
    1

  • 113301
    I've called you more than once on being a Devil's Advocate which can be annoying. I don't think I ever accused you of being a Parade Rainer. I think there's a definite difference between them.

    I take the Parade Rainer as PURPOSELY wanting to cut you down, to diminish you and to hurt/undercut you.  To make you feel SMALL and your joy worthless. It demeans you. That's the goal. Whereas the Devil's Advocate may well see BOTH SIDES of an issue. There are a couple of things I'm on the fence about so I see both sides and I can't commit to one or the other so I fence sit until I can figger it out. Sometimes I never do. That's how I perceive the difference. I could be wrong of course. I often am. Thank you for your reply Walt! :)
      February 19, 2020 8:15 AM MST
    0

  • 6023
    It's the main reason I chose not to become a lawyer.
    Though it would be a bonus being able to argue either side of the law, it would also be a hindrance if I didn't firmly believe my side was "in the right".

    As my Payroll job often requires me to enforce union contract language, it has the same pro/cons.
    Though it has also resulted in management asking for my input in negotiations, as I can recommend the best way to phrase the contract to try and avoid misinterpretations of what was intended.  (not that they always listen to my suggestions, but when they don't they often later wish they did.  lol)
      February 19, 2020 8:24 AM MST
    1

  • 113301
    Even though it can be annoying and I've communicated that to you on occasion Walt being able to FAIRLY see the advantages/disadvantages of both sides of am issue is a very worthwhile thing. Because if you don't/can't/won't how can you possibly make the best decision? You can't so how is that helpful to anyone? It's funny odd. Years ago for one month I went to Southwestern Law School. I think that was the name. It was many decades ago. Folks said "you should be a lawyer" which is really flattering. At least I thought so at the time. So I applied and was accepted and attended long enough to learn it wasn't gonna be my cuppa tea. First of all they tell you that EVERYONE DESERVES A ROBUST DEFENSE. "Even the guilty" I asked? You know the answer to that and I knew right then I wouldn't be able to do that. So I left. Thank you for your reply. I'm gonna Google it and see if they still exist! :) OMG Walt! It's still there! It was founded in 1911! It's still going strong apparently. WOW! Who knew? This post was edited by RosieG at February 19, 2020 8:36 AM MST
      February 19, 2020 8:33 AM MST
    0