August 20, 2005

If, in the requested process of communication, one person cannot be bothered to read with any care whatsoever what the other has already written: why should the other be bothered to write it again and again? In fact, why should the other be bothered to create something of any detail for the requester in the first place? It takes far more time to write than to read. Is the requester's time to be considered so much more valuable than the writer's? Does the requester consider themself to be so much more valuable a person than the writer?

(A small irony that, while most [not all!] would instinctively and automatically answer in the negative for that last -- most [not all!] of us tend to be very reluctant about being overt in displaying our obvious superiority -- our actions tell us truer than any amount of self-description ever will. If a given person objects to this image of themself, thinking otherwise and with other intent: consider also how actions might be altered to reflect the personal self image. If there is no inner need to alter actions: then they reflect the truth of the person, whatever their words might say.)

My test for fairness for all such things is inversion and reciprocation: would the requester accept for themself what they are demanding of the other? (In the inversion, perhaps becoming aware for the first time that it is a demand?)

Comments: Post a Comment



<< Home