|
|
|
|
News item today: People are no longer to be called failures. They are to be referred to as 'deferred successes'. *screams and tears hair out*
"You are a complete and utter deferred success!"
Unfortunately there'll be people out there who believe in this rubbish and insist that others should follow it.
Aaaaaah
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
or "You indefinitely deferred success!"
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
This is just too much....
I've known several failures...... they are failures because they failed....
BUT!!!! I have to admit that I did have a deferred success once......
That was at the track and the dog I bet on won because of an inquiry into the status of the dog first over the line.
Fortunatly it deferred to me $400.00.......
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nigel wrote:
> News item today: People are no longer to be called failures. They are to be referred to as 'deferred successes'. *screams and tears hair out*
Ummm. I DO have a problem with labelling PEOPLE as failures (or anything much else) because it can get internalised, and turned into a self-fulfilling prophecy. But I don't have any objection to people 'failing' a particular exam or goal.
I'm all in favour of seeking out and encouraging the particular qualities that each of us has - physical or intellectual or musical or artistic ability, compassion, acceptance, determination ... whatever.
I have strong objections to *compulsory* competitive sports in schools ... because they can lead to severe self-esteem problems for the less physically able or advanced. But I'm fine with the principle of physical exercise - Frisbee is good!
However, to deny that different people have different skills and abilities is just crass. To be honest, I'd prefer it if we didn't have pass/fail exams and just concentrated on grades or percentages ... that would avoid some of the labelling. I'd prefer it if we as a society valued other attributes as much as we value intellectual or sporting abilities. But to dumb down and pretend that all people are the same, rather than all people being potentially of equal value, is ridiculous.
It's bad enough at the moment: we've been so scared in the UK of making anyone feel "inferior" that we've actually almost lost the ability to distinguish the competent (in any given field) and the talented. And as an employer I certainly don't want to have staff who are going to make a 'deferred success' of looking after customers - I want people who understand the concept of levels of ability to do this, and both feel and can demonstrate that they excel at it!
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
NW wrote:
> I have strong objections to *compulsory* competitive sports in schools ... because they can lead to severe self-esteem problems for the less physically able or advanced. But I'm fine with the principle of physical exercise - Frisbee is good!
The real problem in schools with sports is that those like me who were useless at football were not taught how to be better. Instead we were despised as being useless. But I went to school to learn things, and I woudl have learnt if I had not been despised.
I don't object to competitions per se. The world is full of it. Better to leanr to win at things as a kid. And you cannot fool kids. Sports day when my son was 11, they changed to non competitiove bean bag passing "races". One kid said "Don't bother to come, Grandpa, they are just winky wanky games". All the kids hated that sports day, including the people like me, the "useless ones"
>
> However, to deny that different people have different skills and abilities is just crass. To be honest, I'd prefer it if we didn't have pass/fail exams and just concentrated on grades or percentages ... that would avoid some of the labelling. I'd prefer it if we as a society valued other attributes as much as we value intellectual or sporting abilities. But to dumb down and pretend that all people are the same, rather than all people being potentially of equal value, is ridiculous.
You know, all people just do not have the same value. ~waits for abuse to stop~
My wife teaches rising 6 year olds. She works really hard to bring the incompetent on. Really hard. Even so, six weeks into the year, she can spot life's toilet cleaners. Now we need clean toilets, but to be able to spot it at 5 years old and to work hard to teach that child and stil have the child unable to be taught does really show that we are not all potentially of equal value. Unless we value a toilet cleaner at the same level as a wealth creator, or a leader, or s research scientist, or a policeman, or a nurse.
>
> It's bad enough at the moment: we've been so scared in the UK of making anyone feel "inferior" that we've actually almost lost the ability to distinguish the competent (in any given field) and the talented. And as an employer I certainly don't want to have staff who are going to make a 'deferred success' of looking after customers - I want people who understand the concept of levels of ability to do this, and both feel and can demonstrate that they excel at it!
To excel one needs to be able to see those who do not excel get fired.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy wrote:
> I don't object to competitions per se. The world is full of it. Better to leanr to win at things as a kid. And you cannot fool kids. Sports day when my son was 11, they changed to non competitiove bean bag passing "races". One kid said "Don't bother to come, Grandpa, they are just winky wanky games". All the kids hated that sports day, including the people like me, the "useless ones"
I'd agree with much of that. My only caveats are:
- that we should actually be able to encourage people to take a pride in what they do achieve, not just concentrate on the winner.
- that competitive sports should be voluntary not compulsory. And I like combining "sports day" with musical or other events - again, on a voluntary basis.
>
> You know, all people just do not have the same value. ~waits for abuse to stop~
Much as my political and religious convictions urge me to think that people do have equal value, I don't. I used the words "potentially equal value" after quite a lot of thought. The value of the Rev John Smid (Love in Action) is in my estimation considerably less than the value of most other people - including the two people I employ to clean toilets in our Town Halls.
>
> My wife teaches rising 6 year olds. She works really hard to bring the incompetent on. Really hard. Even so, six weeks into the year, she can spot life's toilet cleaners. Now we need clean toilets, but to be able to spot it at 5 years old and to work hard to teach that child and stil have the child unable to be taught does really show that we are not all potentially of equal value. Unless we value a toilet cleaner at the same level as a wealth creator, or a leader, or s research scientist, or a policeman, or a nurse.
It depends on what else the toilet cleaner does! A toilet cleaner who puts a lot of his time, effort, and money into helping other people who he sees as in need of assistance (as one of my staff does) is to my mind more valuable than a leader like Rev. Smid. But I'd agree that some kinds of ability and talent - including intellectual and musical ability - can be spotted at a very early age. And people having such (any) abilities should be encouraged to develop them to their fullest potential. The question is, what value we put on what abilities.
And I think that as a society we have massively over-valued intellectual ability, the outward signs (car-house-etc ownership) and 'leadership skills' over other things. If Rev Smid had been encouraged to develop the compassion to help others on their own terms, rather than his undoubted leadership skills, I suspect that I for one would find it easier to value him as a person.
>
> To excel one needs to be able to see those who do not excel get fired.
I usually try coaching/mentoring first, in case there are specific issues to be overcome. But yes, I do fire people who do not meet the standards I expect. I try to make it as little of a personal rejection as I can, and am happy to discuss positive routes forward for the person concerned.I hope that I convey my belief that their failure to achieve a satisfactory standard does not imply that they, as people, are failures. I may often lose a night's sleep over the decision. But yes, ultimately, it is no use to me, my organisation, or to the person concerned to keep them in a post that they do not have the skills/ability/aptitude to fulfill properly.
So, I don't believe in labelling people 'failures'. I do believe that people can and do fail "at" things - indeed, anyone who doesn't ever fail at anything is probably not challenging themselves enough.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the reports of this conference unfold I think 'failure' is meant more as an abstract noun than as a common noun, which puts a slightly different slant on the arguments in this thread, but I still disagree with it.
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Re: PC gone mad 
) 
;-D
