All I long for, all I have longed for for years is to retire (prior to wanting to retire, my ambition was to play). Given a chance not to work, I would take it. However, this is not because of laziness or some inherent trait of sloth. Rather it is because I want to pursue my own interests and ideas; I want to do my own thing. One of the saddest things I find in talking with people about not working (aside from obvious disapproval) is that they like working, they would get bored not working, after all, there is only so much TV one can watch. Hmmm ... a pretty sad comment I think. I have a mind full of ideas. There are lots of things which grab my interest, which distract me as I journey through life. Finding what I want to do is hard., because every week I can have a new thing I want to pursue. Some might argue that I am not disciplined. Definitely, I am a poor finisher - great starter, but lousy finisher. I believe I have found what my ideal job would be: owning and running an incubato
Comments
"If someone says, 'It's not about the money, it's about the principle', it's about the money."
Everybody is not as gifted with words as you are, Richard. You are very articulate, and we all know how intelligent you are.
Some people might refer to the principle of the matter when they can't explain in words exactly what they mean.
Sometimes I can feel that something is right. I don't have to verbally utter a list of premises and a valid conclusion. It's in my heart. I can feel it.
But then again, maybe this is just a demonstration of my unintelligence.
(There many other examples in various shades of gray not a sdramatic as this one.)
man with the fun (I think I am going to start calling you matt again to save myself some typing). It is not a question of being literate, since it tends to be literate people who use that expression more. Less literate people tend to use, "Because I said so!" (Incidentally, not to worry, I was not hot under the collar when I wrote that and nothing had spurred it aside from wanting to get a post out.)
MOI: I think the world is black and white, people just muddle it up and make it grey. I have no problem with principled people, I have a problem with people standing on principle.
For a straw man example, consider a strongly unionized organization with a clear divisions of labour. Suppose you have two classes of workers - supervisory and manual labourer. The manual labourer is digging a hole, the sides collapse in and trap him.
"John! Can you grab a shovel and dig me out!"
“I'll radio for a labourer to come and help you out."
"I can't wait. I'm feeling something sharp digging into my left thigh."
"It's not my job."
"I don't care if it's your job or not! I need help getting out now!"
"I want to help you, but it's the principle of the matter."
I do this in my job all the time. Disciplining children in school is a good example. There is no rule that everyone uses each time without considering the other factors involved. It is still very subjective and I'm glad they usually give us the credit making these calls in an intelligent humanistic way.
As always, Richard, you manage to open a can of worms that would take a lifetime to debate! But you provide good fodder for our brain growth! Keep doing that!
MOI: I never intend to open a can of worms. For me the issue is simple and clear cut - black and white, you might say.
barbara: The difficulty is that there is some subtle linguistic difference in being a principled person and someone saying, "It is the principle of the thing.".
In English, at least no natively spoken / written English I am familiar with, do we defend moral or ethical actions / choices by saying, "It is the principle of the thing." We will, instead, use moral or emotional terms to defend our position. (I am willing to give non-native speakers the benefit of the doubt, since linguistic usage may be different in their native tongue).
When a person says, "It is the principle of the matter." As far as I am concerned they are not arguing about the morality or ethics of something, they are simply arguing about the letter of the law.
While precision in the use of words is important - it certainly reduces misunderstandings if we all use words in pretty much the same way - it is equally important not to get carried away with the precise meanings and nuances of words, but to understand them in the broader context. And all I'm pointing out is that "It's the principle of the matter" is never used in a moral context, simply a legalistic or power one.
Or ... maybe I need to go and brush up on my understanding of the English language.