Do people really mean it when they say they just want what's best for everyone?
Last night was the first meeting of the writing group. It is a quirky group. The other Odyssey grad seems like a good contact to have. He told me about a group led by Ted White near here. I’m thinking about looking into that one, too. I suppose I can’t be gone every evening. Anyway, this group (the one from last night) will force me to produce at least two pieces a month. That alone is worth the price of admission. Well, the price of gasoline, anyway.
Comments
The giveaway is the word 'just.' If they say they 'just' want anything, they're selling something. Usually it means they are (a) willing to be the arbiter of what is best for everyone, and (b) willing to apportion whatever compromise will be required to approach that mean. Usually by assigning it to you, with the next phrase: "Be reasonable."
On the other hand, who has ever heard the phrase without the 'just'? "I want what's best for everyone." Sounds a bit grandiose. Sounds impossible. Sounds obvious. The 'just' tones it down. If you 'just' want that, your motives are good! You're a good person.
On the other, other hand, who has ever heard, "I just want what's best for Nicole -- I really don't care what happens to Ashley"? Or: "I just want what's best for the team -- I really don't care what happens to me."
We have heard this of course. And it's quite refreshing. Now we're getting somewhere. We have an idea where you stand. That you do have a stand.
Where everything is given an equal gloss of impossibly easy goodness, it's harder to find truth.
Then again, maybe I misunderstood the question. :-)