83,229
edits
Doubt: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
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 25: | Line 25: | ||
Worse yet, it encourages those in the relationship not to talk to each other, for fear of prejudicing their pre-constructed legal protections. They may even feel, without Legal’s sanction, they cannot. This is exactly opposite to the optimal outcome. If there is a problem, ''get on the phone''. ''Talk''. Flex that relationship. ''Reinforce'' the trust and credit you have accumulated. In a positive-sum relationship, each party’s ultimate outcome is the other’s wellbeing. The longer they live the longer the relationship can last. The value of the relationship to each side is a function of ''time''.<ref>This is ''logically true'': if a relationship has a positive value — any value greater than nil — then prolonging it is the best outcome. If the relationship has a ''negative'' value for either side, that side should end it now, regardless of its prognosis. Why wait?</ref> | Worse yet, it encourages those in the relationship not to talk to each other, for fear of prejudicing their pre-constructed legal protections. They may even feel, without Legal’s sanction, they cannot. This is exactly opposite to the optimal outcome. If there is a problem, ''get on the phone''. ''Talk''. Flex that relationship. ''Reinforce'' the trust and credit you have accumulated. In a positive-sum relationship, each party’s ultimate outcome is the other’s wellbeing. The longer they live the longer the relationship can last. The value of the relationship to each side is a function of ''time''.<ref>This is ''logically true'': if a relationship has a positive value — any value greater than nil — then prolonging it is the best outcome. If the relationship has a ''negative'' value for either side, that side should end it now, regardless of its prognosis. Why wait?</ref> | ||
Here doubt is the best motivating factor. “Hey, legal, what does this clause in our legal agreement, that we signed 19 years ago, mean? Can we do this?” | |||
The correct answer, which will rarely issue from the lips of a [[legal eagle][, is, “well, why in God’s name are you asking ''me''? Shouldn’t you ask your ''client''?” | |||
For, really, what possible use can a clause hammered out 19 years ago be in getting to the heart of the matter? If, now, your client would not like you to balance I've this way what difference does it make to your ongoing relationship, that a 19 year old document says that you can?<ref>Much more likely will e that it ''won’t'' say that you ''can’t'', which is a much no more nuanced position. | |||
==={{t|Epistemology}} of [[certainty]]=== | ==={{t|Epistemology}} of [[certainty]]=== | ||