Not everybody is a game-changer, but everybody can make a game-changing impact: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) m (Amwelladmin moved page Not everybody is a game-changer, but everybody can make a game-changing impact and contribution to Not everybody is a game-changer, but everybody can make a game-changing impact) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 19:40, 13 October 2020
Crappy advice you find on LinkedIn™
|
Let’s put this one through the syllogistic wringer. This means one of two things, either
- (a) not everyone is a game-changer, but everyone can be a game-changer even though some — most, even — ultimately are not, in which case, so what? What use is someone who could be, but eventually isn’t, a game-changer? And if we are being deterministic about it — something the JC is not usually minded to do, except to prove a point like this one, but still — if it turns out you aren’t a game-changer, then it was as true then add it is now, that you were never going to be one, you just didn't know it. In which case in what sense was it ever really true that you could be a game-changer?
P1 Not everybody is a game-changer, P2 Everybody can make a game-changing impact and contribution