Originally Posted by
awuh1 
GT you use the phrase “alleged to have made a Big Plan” and yet you state “whether or not someone makes the Big Plan is utterly immune from judgement”. If in fact a BP is “utterly immune from judgement” the word “alleged” is not appropriate. You can’t have it both ways.
“If I decide to go along with my Beast and have a drink - success - I drank.
If I decide to separate from my Beast and not have a drink - success - I remained abstinent.”
This is exactly what I was talking about. Air tight reasoning by way of tautology. You said it yourself, “there's no possibility of failure”.
I think if I had left out the "alleged", THEN I would be making a judgement that I would never be able to prove. The "alleged" specifically means I am NOT making a judgement on whether it really is a Big Plan or not.
"If I decide to go along with my Beast" is the opposite of "If I decide to separate from my Beast", so, as I understand tautology, I'm not
"using different words to say the same thing" (this quote from Wikipedia Tautology page), I'm using the same word "success" to describe two very different things.
I suppose if I were to say "I believed I would never drink again and then had a drink a number of hours later" and also said "I had suddenly decided to drink without a conscious process" - that sounds to me like
"a series of self-reinforcing statements that cannot be disproved because they depend on the assumption that they are already correct" (this quote from wikipedia Tautology page).