![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
One of Its Legs Is Not the Same
Apr. 30th, 2008 08:09 pm(Today's title is the answer to "What's the difference between a duck?)
Today I told several people at work about my philosophy that things cannot be both the same and not the same. Yes, they can be the same in some ways and different in some ways. But they cannot be the same in every way and different in some ways. Can it be true that bureaucrats discuss the laws of physics or philosophy or whatever this is?
I hope I do not know all the facts, but it appears that a professor wants to get credit for teaching three courses at the same time. This, in itself, is not uncommon. For example, you might teach a Music class called "The History of Rock and Roll" at the same time as you are teaching a History class called "The History of Rock and Roll." This is really the same class listed under two departments so it can be found and counted by people looking for courses in either department. It has lots of both music and history content. All is good.
But when the courses have different titles and one course can fulfill a science requirement but another one can't, then they are different in some ways. So, it seems like you should teach them differently, doesn't it? It can't be both a real science class and not a real science class at the same time, can it?
I am trying to convince some of my fellow bureaucrats that we can just say no sometimes. Not because our little bureaucratic systems cannot deal with things that are both the same and different (we actually have ways of making this work because we are creative and awesome), but because it seems like someone is trying to pull a fast one. All the other people who should have been saying no first have various reasons for not doing so, and so perhaps we should say it.
Blog entry of the day - My most cost-effective renovation projects at Funny About Money. Finally, someone who discusses this concept in a way I can respect, as if what makes your life better actually matters in a renovation (as opposed to just what percentage of your money you could get back if you sold the house). Learn about her two most cost-effective updates.
Compared to keeping a carpet clean, "[k]eeping a hard floor clean is very, very easy. You never have to call in a professional with heavy equipment to pick up the dirt. When the dog barfs on it, you just wipe up the mess and spray on some disinfectant. When dirt or rainy mud tracks in, you just mop it up. Better yet, a Swiffer, a dust mop, or a vac-broom cleans the dust—and icky dust mites!—out from under the bed in seconds, with no heavy lifting."
Today I told several people at work about my philosophy that things cannot be both the same and not the same. Yes, they can be the same in some ways and different in some ways. But they cannot be the same in every way and different in some ways. Can it be true that bureaucrats discuss the laws of physics or philosophy or whatever this is?
I hope I do not know all the facts, but it appears that a professor wants to get credit for teaching three courses at the same time. This, in itself, is not uncommon. For example, you might teach a Music class called "The History of Rock and Roll" at the same time as you are teaching a History class called "The History of Rock and Roll." This is really the same class listed under two departments so it can be found and counted by people looking for courses in either department. It has lots of both music and history content. All is good.
But when the courses have different titles and one course can fulfill a science requirement but another one can't, then they are different in some ways. So, it seems like you should teach them differently, doesn't it? It can't be both a real science class and not a real science class at the same time, can it?
I am trying to convince some of my fellow bureaucrats that we can just say no sometimes. Not because our little bureaucratic systems cannot deal with things that are both the same and different (we actually have ways of making this work because we are creative and awesome), but because it seems like someone is trying to pull a fast one. All the other people who should have been saying no first have various reasons for not doing so, and so perhaps we should say it.
Blog entry of the day - My most cost-effective renovation projects at Funny About Money. Finally, someone who discusses this concept in a way I can respect, as if what makes your life better actually matters in a renovation (as opposed to just what percentage of your money you could get back if you sold the house). Learn about her two most cost-effective updates.
Compared to keeping a carpet clean, "[k]eeping a hard floor clean is very, very easy. You never have to call in a professional with heavy equipment to pick up the dirt. When the dog barfs on it, you just wipe up the mess and spray on some disinfectant. When dirt or rainy mud tracks in, you just mop it up. Better yet, a Swiffer, a dust mop, or a vac-broom cleans the dust—and icky dust mites!—out from under the bed in seconds, with no heavy lifting."