Two men are facing off against each other. One man has nothing to lose, the other has everything to lose.
Who is the more formidable opponent and why?
With Riley's wealth of knowledge about, well, everything, coupled with her combat training, I'm going with her.
Initially, I could see how each might have the advantage, but after reading Riley's response, I can definitely see her point.
.
I think it might be a tie. The one who has everything to lose would fight to protect it. In a way, this can also restrict him, but he'll be fighting harder.
The one who has nothing to lose is more free and more likely to push things beyond a "safe" limit. But, at the same time, he wouldn't have the same passion as the other one.
So, I see it as a glass half full or empty type of question. The glass is BOTH half full and half empty. I see a guy who has everything to lose and a guy who has nothing to lose as equally formidable opponents.
If one guy has nothing to loose, why would he even bother fighting? There is nothing to fight for, in the first place. If the guy has everything to loose, why would he fight...risking loosing everything? People who "face off" over things, always end up losing something!! There are no winners in these situations. People who protect what they have and love, do not do stupid things to lose it. People who have nothing to protect and love, don't bother.
God, because he has created these men. :)
I think that, logically, the O. with nothing to lose is more dangerous. Terrorism is a good example of that.
The person that has something to lose would be more motivated to win than the person that has nothing.
The one who has nothing to lose - he has no reason to live and would most likely blow them both up because he has NOTHING to lose...
Not having read the other responses, I am going with the one with nothing to lose. He can do anything without any consequences (save death... which he clearly doesn't care about).
The one who has everything to lose. When you have everything to lose you have more vested in the outcome than if you lose nothing in the loss. In other words nothing to lose also means nothing to win.
Interesting......i would say the man with everything to lose would be better. He would find inner strength from what he has supporting him and waiting for him, while the man with nothing to lose has only his strength.
