Meaning: The quote provided is a satirical definition of the term "compromise" by Ambrose Bierce, a renowned American journalist and writer known for his wit and cynicism. Bierce's definition humorously portrays compromise as a resolution in which each party involved feels like they have given up something they should rightfully have while gaining something they shouldn't.

Ambrose Bierce's definition of compromise encapsulates the inherent complexities and paradoxes often associated with the concept. On the surface, compromise is often viewed as a positive and necessary means of resolving conflicts and reaching agreements. It is seen as a way to achieve a middle ground, where neither party gets everything they want but both make concessions for the greater good. However, Bierce's definition sheds light on the less idealistic aspects of compromise, highlighting the underlying self-interest and dissatisfaction that can accompany it.

In Bierce's satirical definition, the term "adversary" suggests a sense of opposition or conflict between the parties involved in the compromise. This choice of words implies that compromise often arises in situations where there are conflicting interests or viewpoints, and both parties are positioned as adversaries seeking to protect their own interests. The notion of "conflicting interests" emphasizes the divergent desires and needs that drive the parties to seek a compromise in the first place.

The phrase "gives each adversary the satisfaction of thinking he has got what he ought not to have" is a clever and caustic commentary on the nature of compromise. Bierce suggests that in a compromise, each party may feel a sense of victory in obtaining something they believe they shouldn't rightfully have. This could be interpreted as a sardonic commentary on human nature, pointing to the tendency for individuals to seek more than they deserve or to feel entitled to more than their fair share.

The latter part of Bierce's definition, "and is deprived of nothing except what was justly his due," further reinforces the cynical undertone of the quote. Here, Bierce implies that in a compromise, each party may perceive themselves as having made sacrifices, while in reality, they have only relinquished what was truly their due. This facetious portrayal of compromise as a process that leaves individuals feeling both triumphant and aggrieved highlights the inherent complexities and contradictions within the concept.

It is important to note that Bierce's definition of compromise should be viewed in the context of his larger body of work, which often employed satire and dark humor to critique societal norms and human behavior. His satirical approach to defining compromise challenges the conventional understanding of the term and invites reflection on the underlying motivations and dynamics involved in the process of reaching a compromise.

In conclusion, Ambrose Bierce's satirical definition of compromise offers a thought-provoking commentary on the nature of negotiation and conflict resolution. Through his wry and incisive language, Bierce prompts readers to consider the complexities and contradictions inherent in the concept of compromise, while also highlighting the often self-serving and paradoxical nature of human interactions. His definition serves as a reminder to approach the notion of compromise with a critical eye, acknowledging its potential for both resolution and discontent.