In a message dated 10/9/00 7:01:31 PM, dorisopran@a... writes:
<< having been both honest and dishonest as well as employing a number of behaviors falling into a continuum between the two extremes, and also having been both pregnant and non-pregnant, let me respectfully suggest to you and to everyone on the list that that analogy is bogus. >>
I agree that the analogy isn't perfect. But there's a substantial difference between trying to characterize people as opposed to discrete deeds. Over a period of time, it might very well be impossible to call anyone completely honest. We're all human, and there are many temptations (and sometimes valid reasons) for being less than 100% (sometimes brutally?) honest.
But individual deeds are easier to categorize--and that's what we've been talking about. Being less than fully truthful in a situation such as a resume or a contest entry is a dishonest act, no matter what the motivation or how one might be tempted to rationalize it (the rules are unfair, everyone else does it, I deserve recognition, I need financial help, I'm better than the other contestants, etc.).
A better analogy might be speeding. It's against the law, yet we all do it from time to time, and rationalize our behavior. But that doesn't change the fact that we've broken the law.
Judy
|
| |