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) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|shitmaxim|}} | {{a|shitmaxim|}} | ||
Let’s put this one through the syllogistic wringer. This means one of two things, either: | Let’s put this one through the syllogistic wringer. This means one of two things, either: | ||
===Not everyone ''is'' a [[game-changer]], but everyone ''can be'' a [[game-changer]]=== | |||
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 when proving a point like this one, but still — if it turns out you ''aren’t'' a [[game-changer]] now, then it was as true then as it is now, that you were ''never'' going to be one: you just didn’t know it. In which case, was it ever really true that you ''could'' be a [[game-changer]]? We say no. | |||
If not that, then it must seek to draw a distinction between a “[[game-changer]]” and a “person who makes a game-changing impact”. But the latter seem, to your correspondent, to be the very definition of the former. Building in our previous learning, we can extract the following: | If not that, then it must seek to draw a distinction between a “[[game-changer]]” and a “person who makes a game-changing impact”. But the latter seem, to your correspondent, to be the very definition of the former. Building in our previous learning, we can extract the following: | ||