Why, hello yourself, Al!
I've finally found someone who's doing the work I wish I had time for. My life is dedicated to my loved ones ("Love is exception-making," Miss Rand said), and I refuse to give up the commitments I've made out of love, so I am not able to dedicate the time I would need to do this kind of thinking, but thank God somebody can:
Judgement is evaluation, not condemnation. You judge only as a guide to future actions. It is irrational to expect your judgement to have any effect on anyone else - it is for you alone to use. But you don't get out of the work of thinking and integrating anymore than the subject of your judgement does. Your knowledge is as incomplete as everyone else's; you're evaluation is as subject to error as anyone elses. For that reason, your judgement of other people and their actions can never be absolute. Your judgement of these must always carry with it and additional judgement of how complete your knowledge is - what your chance for error is - that tempers the judgement with some level of uncertainty, even if it is infinitesimal.
The debate in the comments is worth whatever you invest in it. Time is money, as they say (though, really, money is banked time).
This line is particularly important to understanding the post, "the purpose of judgement is not that of influencing those you judge, but influencing your own actions."
I have one tiny little quibble with Kyle's style: "judgment" has only one "e." Strange, but true. Otherwise, the man has advanced my understanding dramatically and deserves a prominent place in my link bar.
No comments:
Post a Comment