I wonder what a 'sort' of person is? Most often when someone declaims: I'm not that sort of person! they are denying a very narrow similarity.
I don't steal, I'm not that sort of person.
I don't drink and drive, I'm not that sort of person.
I don't hit my kids, I'm not that sort of person.
I don't have pets, I'm not that sort of person.
I don't take drugs, I'm not that sort of person.
A 'sort' seems to be a reference to our personal sterotypes. We associate behaviours into a cluster from which we derive our homogenous 'sort'. What I mean by 'sort' could be entirely different to your 'sort'. The sort of person I think of who doesn't take drugs is likely to be quite different to your idea of a non-drug-user. It depends a lot on whether you take drugs.
I'm an all-sorts of person. I've come to realise over my lifetime that there is actually very little that I wouldn't do in extreme circumstances - much of the ugly side of life is coming to terms with that in your head. I know that I would kill another human in self-defence. But I also know that there a bunch of nicer traits there as well, like loyalty and humour.
I have learned not to say "I'm not that sort of person" because that kind of statement will come back to bite you on the ass when circumstances change.
About the only sorts of people I know I'm definitely not is a paedophile, a torturer or a rapist. I would not knowingly force drugs, sex or misery on another person unless I were forced to.
In extremis, however, almost anything else is uncertain. I'm just that sort of person.
It seems to me that "sort of person" is usually used in the negative - ie, I'm not the sort of person who does xyz instead of I am the sort of person who does. So I think it is used fairly generally - eg I'm not the sort to go round hitting kids on the head (to pick a random activity) - there might be 20 different "sorts" of people who do, but I'm not one of them. I agree with you though - that until you've been in a situation it's very difficult to say what "sort" of person you'd turn out to be.
Did you know that if someone holds a gun to your head and tells you to kill someone else or they'll kill you, you'll still be done for murder. You probably wouldn't be given a very large sentence, but it's still murder.
Posted by: Emba at May 6, 2005 06:31 PMSo what you're saying is, it's best to kill *both* of them so that there are no witnesses.
Excellent. I shall keep it in mind, because anyone who gave me a gun - even if they have one too - had better look out. I'm told that an excitiable personality and limited intelligence with functions guns no well..
Posted by: phreq at May 7, 2005 02:32 PM