credibility

I read daily, not so much for the benefit of my writing, but because I am addicted to it. There is nothing in the world for me that compares to being lost in a really good novel. That said, reading is an absolute must if you want to write. It is a trite enough thing to say, but very true nonetheless. I cannot understand aspiring writers who email me for advice and freely admit that they read very little. I have learned something from every writer I have ever read. Sometimes I have done so consciously, picking up something about how to frame a scene, or seeing a new possibility with regards to structure, or interesting ways to write dialogue. Other times, I think, my collective reading experience affects my sensibilities and informs me in ways that I am not quite aware of, but in real ways that impact how I approach writing. The short of it is, as an aspiring writer, there is nothing as damaging to your credibility as saying that you don__ like to read

You can't get what you want, if the intentions are solely directed for self-benefits.

When you have nothing to show up for having lived for many decades, you are likely to borrow other people__ credibility which won__ fit! Live like you!

Every action or perceived inaction shapes credibility.

Deep inside, you know it. You're trustworthy. Sadly, you may come across untrustworthy. What are robbing your credibility? Find and fix it!

When you break the promises, you loose the credibility. When you loose the credibility, you loose the trust. So, keep your promises, because trust is the foundation of soulfully inspired life.

Writing for the sake of writing, writing that draws its credibility from its very existence, is a foreign idea to most Americans. As a culture, we want cash on the barrel head. We want writing to earn dollars and sense so that it makes sense to us. We have a conviction__hich is naive and misplaced__hat being published has to do with being __ood_ while not being published has to do with being __mateur._ ...__id you write today?___es.___hen you__e a writer today.__t would be lovely if being a writer were a permanent state that we could attain to. It__ not, or if it is, the permanence comes posthumously.A page at a time, a day at a time, is the way we must live our writing lives. Credibility lies in the act of writing. That is where the dignity is. That is where the final __redit_ must come from.

When everyone believes they are the life coaches, who are the players?

In order to escape accountability for his crimes, the perpetrator does everything in his power to promote forgetting. Secrecy and silence are the perpetrator__ first line of defense. If secrecy fails, the perpetrator attacks the credibility of his victim. If he cannot silence her absolutely, he tries to make sure that no one listens. To this end, he marshals an impressive array of arguments, from the most blatant denial to the most sophisticated and elegant rationalization. After every atrocity one can expect to hear the same predictable apologies: it never happened; the victim lies; the victim exaggerates; the victim brought it upon herself; and in any case it is time to forget the past and move on. The more powerful the perpetrator, the greater is his prerogative to name and define reality, and the more completely his arguments prevail.

The truth is, there is good and bad in everybody, in every nation, in every race, and in every religion. To hear someone say that all the people that belong to a certain country, race, or religion are bad _ is extremely untruthful and makes the person making the statement lose credibility right away. We are all flawed and even nature is flawed. Nobody is perfect, and no country, race or religion is perfect. Duality and polarity are imprinted in everything in nature _ in all humans, and even within ourselves. For example, there are those who are ignorant, and those who are wise.

Cronkite is not a genius at anything except being straight, honest, and normal.

Leadership is fundamentally about credibility.

You can't believe everything people tell you - not even if those people are your own brain.

The intelligence failures with respect to Iraq were massive and have damaged our credibility around the world.

Lack of credibility slays your character

Several psychologists (L. Armstrong, 1994; Enns, McNeilly, Corkery, & Gilbert, 1995; Herman, 1992; McFarlane & van der Kolk, 1996; Pope & Brown, 1996) contend that the controversy of delayed recall for traumatic events is likely to be influenced by sexism. Kristiansen, Gareau, Mittleholt, DeCourville, and Hovdestad (1995) found that people who were more authoritarian and who had less favorable attitudes toward women were less likely to believe in the veracity of women__ recovered memories for sexual abuse. Those who challenged the truthfulness of recovered memories were more likely to endorse negative statements about women, including the idea that battered women enjoy being abused. McFarlane and van der Kolk (1996) have noted that delayed recall in male combat veterans reported by Myers (1940) and Kardiner (1941) did not generate controversy, whereas delayed recall in female survivors of intrafamilial child sexual abuse has provoked considerable debate.

Credibility comes from results. Everything else is just marketing.

More voices means less trust in any given voice.