Thought for the day

[dr_greghouse_md]

You know what word I hate? 'Compromise'. I hate how people use that word to try and 'better' a situation that doesn't go in your favour.

"Let's compromise on this." "Try to compromise with me." "In order for this to work, we need to compromise."

Compromise just means lowering your standards to meet the needs of others.

Comments

[mcgill_pride]

Well, yeah. You do something like that in an attempt to reach an understanding - which usually implies the issue at hand, or the person being dealt with, means enough for you to sacrifice something.

You don't think that sometimes it's necessary? Vital, even? To give up something and be content with less than perfect because the person you're sacrificing perfect for is more significant?

[dr_greghouse_md]

No such thing as perfect, Mr. Well-Adjusted.

[mcgill_pride]

Okay. You don't think it's necessary to sometimes sacrifice preferable in order to meet a common ground with someone?

People often consider other people to be worth it. Believe it or not.

[dr_greghouse_md]

Why should I sacrifice preferable, something I want, just to keep someone else happy? That's settling for second best. You want to please people and make people like you, settle for second best, join the Rotary Club.

[mcgill_pride]

Because sometimes keeping someone else happy is something people want too. Sometimes second best is better than retaining the blue ribbon alone.

It's not just to please people. It's called giving a damn. You're right, though. If you don't care about anyone that much, then maybe you should keep clinging to that ribbon. Seeing as it's all you've got to cling to.

[dr_greghouse_md]

Keeping someone else happy is something people want to do, why? Because they're cowards? People couldn't give a crap about people who don't concern them, yet do things out of mandatory politeness because people like to be liked. They like to be needed.

You'd know all about that, wouldn't you?

[mcgill_pride]

I was referring to people who do concern them. As far as mandatory politeness - courtesy and politeness isn't mandatory. You'd know all about that, wouldn't you? If it was, it wouldn't be courteous or polite.

You just can't deal with the idea that sometimes people don't have alterior motives. Because then you might have to trust someone and take a chance, really believe in another person, and you're too scared to do that, aren't you?

[dr_greghouse_md]

You can get Freudian all you want, but that's not going to change my opinion that a compromise is nothing but a second-rate standard.

And you're wrong - politeness is mandatory in society. Otherwise people would be subject to mutual destruction. Why do you think people lie, never say what they really think?

[mcgill_pride]

*frowns* Maybe so. They wouldn't call it sacrifice unless it included giving something up.

It's necessary in order to maintain some form of tasteful coexistance, but you don't yield to it. Then again, you come into contact with a good amount of destruction for that reason. So you keep your first-rate standard, and yet you're no less miserable. Interesting.

*sighs* I'm just saying that maybe if you tried, House, just took a chance - if you gave someone a chance to surprise you, they would.