"I suppose I should tell you the honest truth."
I overheard that a few days ago between two coworkers.
Chinese Wisdom Concerning Money
[19September-2007 @ 17:11 EST: Revised preamble. This page still gets the most search hits: There is no Anthony de Croud. The e-mail is SPAM. I post things that pique my fancy at the moment. I like the 8 precepts, but the rest of the e-mail is junk. However, I thought it fair to post everything in its entirety. I did not write the e-mail. I did not forward the e-mail. I strongly encourage you not to forward it either. (I also encourage you to reply to whomever sent you the e-mail and tell them you don't appreciate getting junk mail.)] Received this in our e-mail (English translation follows): PRECEPTO CHINO SOBRE EL DINERO EL DINERO PUEDE COMPRAR UNA CASA, PERO NO UN HOGAR, EL DINERO PUEDE COMPRAR UN RELOJ, PERO NO EL TIEMPO. EL DINERO PUEDE COMPRAR UNA CAMA, PERO NO EL SUEÑO. EL DINERO PUEDE COMPRAR UN LIBRO, PERO NO EL CONOCIMIENTO. EL DINERO PUEDE PAGAR UN MÉDICO, PERO NO LA SALUD. EL DINERO PUEDE COMPRAR UNA POSICIÓN, PERO NO EL RESPETO. EL DINERO PUEDE COMPRAR LA SANGRE, PERO ...
Comments
ohh,happy weekend,Richard! :)
kaymac: Laughter is supposed to be very good medicine.
barbara: It certainly implies that people believe there are various types of truth.
matt: Hmmm ... "God's honest truth" ... to me truth is truth, it is indivisible
freckled-one: I don't know if people are afraid of truth, at the very least they often seem to find it inconvenient.
tin-tin: I always think of a white lie as a game, a small deception that has a definite time when it is over and the truth is revealed.
breal: One would certainly hope so.
It was something that made me stop and think just how many different varieties of truth there are. For me, truth is truth. Most people it seems, or maybe I just hang around with too many lawyers, seem to believe that if what you say is not untrue, then it must be the truth. However, definitely tell you something that is true, but omit to tell you all the details - details which may significantly alter the interpretation of those details. Lawyers are very good at this (Sofia was a lawyer in Peru), a lawyer works on behalf of their client - not on behalf of justice as might be supposed. If they are the defense lawyer, they are interested in presenting their client in the best possible light and will consciously choose not to reveal any information of evidence that puts their client in a bad light. The prosecutor, on the other hand, is interested in vilifying the defendant and is only interested in presenting information damning to the defendant, conveniently ignoring any information that might show the defendant to have any redeeming qualities. So, many half truths are spoken.
Of course, there is the whole issue of privacy and stuff, but that's not where I am going.