What would it take for the Goliath to be the hero and David to be the pessimist? Not just in fictional narrative depictions but throught history too. The only scenario I can think of that kinda fits the mold was 9/11. Where America may not of been the hero or “good guy” but the underdog Taliban was unanimously viewed as the “bad guys.” I’m not super knowledgeable when it comes to global geopolitical relations so I’m all ears for any scenarios that prove otherwise and would love to hear them.
Edit: I am loving all the responses and its a great conversation, I just wish I phrased the title differently so it wasn’t getting downvoted. I didn’t mean for it to come accross like I didn’t think it ever happened.
Most of them also had terrible, traumatic childhood experiences that helped shape them and enabled them to accomplish their various feats, which most of us could never dream of doing.
I dont get what you are trying to say, what is the relevance to the discussion of underdogs vs Goliaths and their being viewed as an optimist or pessimist? Also what’s up with the asterisks? I can’t tell if you are implying the trauma makes them underdogs or if their feats make them the giants.
I do think that coming from a background of severe abuse makes you more of an underdog, in general. It’s certainly not setting you up for success. I’m not praising or condoning their heinous acts, at all. It’s awful, unthinkable stuff, which is why I said:
The asterisks were to emphasize that most people could never even think of doing this stuff–it’s not even an easy thing to discuss.
Got it and totally agree.
I’m still learning how to use markdowns for text so I didn’t know if it was a markdown of a format lemmy on sync app didn’t recognize or maybe it was missing a part of the markdown.
You’re nice, so I feel like I have to admit I was just fucking with you a bit. I intentionally worded it in a way that continued to sound just a little too effusive, because it was funny to me.