Rather than categorically dismiss opinions, ideas and approaches, it might be cooler to develop a fractional risk assessment or something like that.
[Yeah, this is probably going to go nowhere, but it was burning a hole in me this AM, so I am going to spew it into the most enlightened maelstrom I know of: these forums]
Statement to someone who wants to be late going to work and parties and so on in order to seem more important: "If you want to prevail, you cannot be late all the time. Those people who are late earned it and were probably on time all the time on their way to earning the right to be tardy"
This is a categorical dismissal and is also probably, to some extent, untrue.
It might have been better to have stated to the wanna-seem-important-by-being-late person: "You can attempt to image yourself as someone who is important by being late to work and generally coming off with an air that you don't hustle for anyone, but this is a risky approach that could backfire. I am guessing that it succeeds roughly 1-2 percent of the time. The rest of the time, it fails, and you should have a backup plan, or at least be able to continue, rebound, etc."
And, I figured I'd give the post an impressive sounding title so that it seems like I know more than I do.
Will it work? Probably not. Actually, of course not!
But, things like aesthetics are present even in text titles to forums, so who knows what variables will play out.
One more example which arose from discussions with my better half:
She insists that an artist who self-consciously tries to be original and famous will never be original or legendary, but I disagree sharply. Picasso is a perfect example. He saw Matisse works at an exhibit one day and decided he was going to be more original than him.
It is sometimes tough to reach a middle ground when sides are taken, but, in this case, it is probably the case that, generally, artists must love painting and beauty and so on first and foremost, have some artistic talent, and, then, when doing what they love, they have a chance for legendary status.
But, there is also a small but definite chance that the person who enters into a creative field for nothing but glory will succeed in making great works.
And so on.
Am I explaining something REALLY obvious that is a mystery to noone but my clueless self here?
Like, "It's called gaming theory, dude", or something like that.
