tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post97717596266894980..comments2024-03-28T17:35:48.164-06:00Comments on Pro Football Journal: True LiesJohn Turneyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06612706488776938253noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post-6500103403537356892023-01-21T17:44:44.221-07:002023-01-21T17:44:44.221-07:00I appreciate the input and will make changes. I ce...I appreciate the input and will make changes. I certainly do not want to to be misleading in an article about being misleading. Clearly, I am out of my depth on the deeper meanings. Actually, as the movie poster indicates was trying a play on the title of the film. But since I didn't get the meaning of the entry originally a little education on my part was needed.John Turneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06612706488776938253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post-9053746159423071832023-01-21T12:38:32.657-07:002023-01-21T12:38:32.657-07:00As the author of the SEP entry, I have to point ou...As the author of the SEP entry, I have to point out that the opening paragraph makes two mistakes.<br /> <br />"Can the truth ever be a lie? According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy it can be. It's referred to in their literature as "non-deceptionism". [False] Colloquially it can be called 'true lies'. What it means is that if some technically true things are presented in a way that is deceptive to a person or audience. [False] <br /><br />True lies are lies that don't deceive because the liar (unknowingly) tell the truth. Let's say I think my friend is at home, but I lie to someone that he is out of the country in order to make them leave him alone. Well, as it happens, he is out of the country. That is a true lie. I have lied, yes, but the lie (its content) is true. You are not deceived about my friend's whereabouts. (You may be deceived about what I believe, since you think I think he is out of the country and I don't, but that is a different deception). So 'true lies' are lies that don't deceive because they are actually the truth (unknown to the liar). <br /><br />The 'true lie' phenomenon has nothing to do with 'non-deceptionism'. Non-deceptionism is a position that people take on how to define lying. They believe that lies don't have to intend to deceive. They believe in non-deceptive lies (sometimes called 'bald-faced lies'). If, for example, a bully walks up to me and says "That's my money you have", these philosophers consider this to be a ('bald-faced') lie, even though there is no attempt to deceive me. Both the bully and me know that the money is mine. So a 'bald-faced' lie (according to them) is a lie that doesn't deceive because it is not supposed to deceive.<br /><br />It is possible to have a bald-faced lie that is also a true lie. But that would be extremely unlikely. Say, for example, unknown to the bully, I had stolen his money. Then, if he came up to me and said, "That's my money you have," that would be a bald-faced true lie. He believes it is my money, actually, and I believe that he believes that it is my money. But he is mistaken - it is his money. He is bald-faced lying, but what he says is true, unbeknownst to him.<br /><br />Finally, "some technically true things are presented in a way that is deceptive to a person or audience" is completely different matter. That is not a lie of any kind. That is what is called misleading. If, for example, you ask me where my friend is, and I say "This time of the year he is usually out of the country", which is true, even though I believe that right now he is not out of the country, then I am trying to mislead you, although I am not lying. I am asserting what is true, but I am trying to deceive you with it. <br /><br />If you want to talk about this action, however, then telling a "true lie" is the wrong name for this. It is simply called "misleading" (or attempting to mislead), not 'true lying' or indeed any kind of lying.Jameshttp://www.jamesmahon.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post-12063870585986172502019-07-10T08:33:11.769-06:002019-07-10T08:33:11.769-06:00You're right on Holmgren and Seifert. That'...You're right on Holmgren and Seifert. That's what I am saying, why can't the summation of a coaches career, get them in ? If Shanahan helps develop John Elway and Steve Young into champions, and then wins two titles as head coach with Elway, wouldn't the Hall consider his OVERALL body of work ? Or just his two titles ? <br />Tony Dungy is like Flores, in that he is considered a minority success, but he has one title. Was it his winning pct that got him in ? Or his summation/overall body of work ?<br /><br />A player can be an example to. Kyle Rote was an excellent receiver who had no speed. However, he helped the Giants win, coming close to being part of four championships teams, or at least division winners. Then, he becomes a player union representative, who advocates for player rights and conditions, with or without influence. Then he joins the other side of the coin, and becomes an NFL Ambassador, by being an esteemed broadcaster, calling a historical Super Bowl III upset/moment.<br />So even if he can't enter the Hall by his NUMBERS, can he enter for his full career or body of work, as a player and union representative, and NFL broadcaster/ambassador ?Brian wolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03887742217457349700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post-14727725665166600322019-07-09T19:18:36.826-06:002019-07-09T19:18:36.826-06:00Whether Flores gets credit or not, it does not mat...Whether Flores gets credit or not, it does not matter. The point is if people who want Flores is give him credit for that, they do the same for the other 2-win QBs. <br /><br />Seifert developed ROnnie Lott and perfected the "elephant" position with Dean and then Haley.<br /><br />If you want to talk QB development, 1 win, 2-loss coach Holmgren developed, REALLY developed QBs<br /><br />All I am saying as the point of this post is if one of these guys is HOF, then ALL of them are HOF. <br /><br />If you some someone promoting Flores or any of them over the others then you have the right to see if they are being fair or not,.John Turneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06612706488776938253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post-43258652555171715162019-07-08T21:41:57.361-06:002019-07-08T21:41:57.361-06:00From the books I read from John Madden, it seemed ...From the books I read from John Madden, it seemed like he gave Flores a lot of credit because he knew Stabler, who called his own plays, had good communication with Flores, who was calm as well, during games, while Madden was an emotional wreck. Though he was a limited QB himself, from the films I saw of Flores, his coolness and play, reminded me of Bart Starr. I understand what you're saying though.<br /><br />John, what do you think of Buddy Parker ? Were voters turned off by his alcoholism and physical challenges to his players, or did Layne just seem to take rightful attention from him ?Brian wolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03887742217457349700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post-71629969599129418622019-07-08T19:45:22.298-06:002019-07-08T19:45:22.298-06:00I understand the so-called development of Stabler....I understand the so-called development of Stabler. That's likely ture, but when you that though first come out publically?<br /><br />Not in the 1970s or 1980s. It was never talked about. I try to be skeptical about revisionist history or points being made now that were not a "thing" 20-30 years ago. Gives you the sense is it being exaggerated.John Turneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06612706488776938253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post-22413898923500049482019-07-08T16:33:51.125-06:002019-07-08T16:33:51.125-06:00The thoughts on Tom Flores are valid, especially n...The thoughts on Tom Flores are valid, especially not being a HOF player, but I also feel that since Flores as an assistant coach or head coach, contributed to ALL three world championships for the Raiders, thus their WINNING HISTORY, that it could SUMMIZE into a HOF induction.<br />Like you stated before John, Flores may have taken Madden's team and won a SB in 80, but he also helped develop Stabler and Madden's Raider offence on that 76 team. In 80 and 83, he won with a different QB and players, but without Flores, these championships don't happen.<br /><br />Jimmy Johnson and Buddy Parker both won two championships but wasn't the 95 Dallas champions or 57 Detroit champions still considered Johnson's and Parker's, teams ?<br />Parker also won his division and lost to Cleveland in the 54 championship game and like Johnson,floundered coaching another team...same with Flores, but all three have great arguments.Brian wolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03887742217457349700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post-7717548924707556292019-07-06T15:35:50.053-06:002019-07-06T15:35:50.053-06:00Yikes on this thread. Tom Flores was better than ...Yikes on this thread. Tom Flores was better than the original poster indicates, not as good as the reply.<br /><br />Johnson really was the brains behind the Cowboy dynasty of the early 1990s. I'd have no problem with him going in as a result. You could also argue that his coaching career in the NFL at 9 seasons was too short.<br /><br />Flores took over a team that I believe was aging quite a bit at the time. He went all the way as a wild card with a (then) backup QB, and smashed a team that went 14-2 and had already beaten the Raiders than year in the Super Bowl. He also had a losing record after the first Super Bowl, his career in LA petered out with a 5-10 record in his last year and his teams in Seattle had atrocious offense - remember how bad the 1992 team was and Cortez Kennedy was Defensive Player of the Year?<br /><br />I would have no problem with either in or out.<br /><br />I'm not a fan of either team - I'm a Redskins fan and both of these teams had plenty of victories over my team. Trying to look at it objectively. <br /><br />With that said, Jose, that's a real leap to imply racism here. You know nothing about the original poster - it could very well be a Hispanic Cowboy fan. I'm married to a Mexican woman, so it's not bias on my part one way or another. Please refrain from that kind of a statement in the future. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02069528939175182528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post-24471224605792724962019-07-05T13:46:24.763-06:002019-07-05T13:46:24.763-06:00Tom Flores deserves HOF. If you think Johnson is b...Tom Flores deserves HOF. If you think Johnson is better it's cause you are anti-MexicanJose Silveira noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4958997061437462003.post-1324392906900235362019-07-05T00:19:51.177-06:002019-07-05T00:19:51.177-06:00Jimmy Johnson is the best coach not in the HOF. He...Jimmy Johnson is the best coach not in the HOF. He was great at talent evaluation and when he got to Dallas we sucked. And he took us to the promised land. <br /><br />Tom Flores took over a good team that was left in good shape by John Madden and Al Davis.<br /><br />Al Davis was brains behind Tom Flores. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com