20051221
of failures.
had a random thought. not so random actually. it was kinda sparked off by some comments that wasn't very pleasing to the ears. or at least it wasn't to mine. perhaps i'm just too sensitive. but in all cases, had some food for thought.
what exactly is it about failures that make people harp on them again and again? the joke you can make out of it? or the misconception that if they are bad, bad and bad?
why is failure constantly linked to bad? yes, it by itself is no doubt a negative word. just like how success is positive and so failure is negative. but ain't that like a stereotype from decades ago? is failure always bad?
in this case, i think that it's not bad at all. so what if they failed in their planning? and perhaps they fumbled in their execution. but ultimately they've learnt a whole deal out of it. and that is what some people do not see. instead, they simply choose to harp on the fact that "they've failed!"
would you rather someone who does something correctly without understanding the meaning behind? or someone who failed to do it correctly, but from there learnt how it really works and changes for the better?
i guess the crux of it is that people only see the big hoo-hah made about failure and failed to realise the outcome of it, which may be positive actually, as of in this case. so, can i call that a failue in those points of view also?
perhaps one should stop jumping to conclusion. and stop judging people, 'cause we ourselves are way too imperfect to judge others.
group1 soared @ 23:30
xoxo