So, what is interesting here is that in Woodman's philosophy, you don't choose to be strong out of nowhere. Choosing to be strong is forced on you by the circonstances of you life. What's effective is that it gives him an edge over the others because in his head it's a choice he made when he was a kid and he has built his life upon it. For most people, one's own identity is nor clearly defined... and complex... and ever changing... Woodman is capable of believing in his own myth. And that's is probably what actually makes him strong... Good for him
Now, as much as the first part of the proposition is interesting, you'll note the causality link that follows makes no sense. "Having only the choice of being strong gives you the real strength" has the consequence that "only the strongest survive" ? Hmmm ? No logic here...
Besides "Only the strongest survives" is pure bullshit. Here's a little link that came up on the first page of googling about the subject: http://onlyagame.typepad.com/only_a_gam ... rvive.html. Like the guy says: "Only the Strong Survive: Tell that to the dinosaurs !". Of course, you can argue ad aeternam on what is behind the word "strong". Stuff like adaptability, collective intelligence, etc... don't they fit in the general term "strong" ?
Anyway, I think Mr Woodman should get rid of the second part of his signature. But of course that's just my opinion
Oh and untill is writen with one "l", so "until".
