so i woke up in a radio freeze.
So, the other day I was eating dinner with Amy when I noticed a guy wearing a shirt saying, "There's no 'I' in Dunglison" (Dunglison being a first year dorm here at UVA, for all you Pittsford readers). Of course, there is an I in Dunglison, but I assume that there was some sort of inside joke that I didn't understand. Perhaps the explanation was printed on the back of the shirt, but alas, I never saw it.
Anyway, it got me thinking. "There's no 'I' in Dunglison" is an obvious play on the phrase "There's no 'I' in team", and I freakin' hate that phrase. The idea behind the quote, as I'm sure I don't need to explain, is that in a team people need to work for the greater good, as a collective, and ignore their individual goals and desires. Never refer to yourself as an "I", only a "we", part of something larger.
But think about it, folks. If we apply the "there's no 'I' in team" principle, that basically means we have to work on the principle of lowest-common denominator, where nobody is allowed to be more important than the next. But I mean, don't the best teams appeal to individual strengths, thereby enhancing productivity? And, as a second point, it not common for people to split up larger projects so that people can focus their resources on specific portions of a problem? I mean, shit, that's how assembly lines work, and I can't think of better team imagery than that.
At the end of the day, the "no 'I' in team" phrase is kinda short-sighted, sacrificing actual insight in favor of vaguely clever grammatical acrobatics. The middle school English teacher that came up with it while coaching back-slapping soccer boys part time should be ashamed. (disclaimer: I don't actually know who came up with the phrase)
I'm out.
- Ethan
Anyway, it got me thinking. "There's no 'I' in Dunglison" is an obvious play on the phrase "There's no 'I' in team", and I freakin' hate that phrase. The idea behind the quote, as I'm sure I don't need to explain, is that in a team people need to work for the greater good, as a collective, and ignore their individual goals and desires. Never refer to yourself as an "I", only a "we", part of something larger.
But think about it, folks. If we apply the "there's no 'I' in team" principle, that basically means we have to work on the principle of lowest-common denominator, where nobody is allowed to be more important than the next. But I mean, don't the best teams appeal to individual strengths, thereby enhancing productivity? And, as a second point, it not common for people to split up larger projects so that people can focus their resources on specific portions of a problem? I mean, shit, that's how assembly lines work, and I can't think of better team imagery than that.
At the end of the day, the "no 'I' in team" phrase is kinda short-sighted, sacrificing actual insight in favor of vaguely clever grammatical acrobatics. The middle school English teacher that came up with it while coaching back-slapping soccer boys part time should be ashamed. (disclaimer: I don't actually know who came up with the phrase)
I'm out.
- Ethan