If you have read more than one of my posts, you have probably realized that I am a little snobby.
I am coming to terms with this...but have not yet decided that anything about that needs to change.
Matt (my boyfriend) says this is a direct result of how I was raised. (My brother is amazingly snobby as well.)
So, in keeping with the snobbiness (not an actual word)...today's thoughts.
Is there a difference between excellence and perfection?
I think so. I think perfection would be free from error, whereas excellence would be to the best of your ability.
If this is the case, I don't see anything wrong with striving for excellence all of the time.
Why is it that some people are okay with being mediocre?
Why do something if you are going to half-ass it?
(This coming from the girl who did just enough to get by in college. Hooray for a 3.0!)
3 comments:
i hold the view that sometimes the best you can do is not always the best choice. for example, i could have got a 4.0 if i spent all my free time studying and reading, while neglecting all my relationships and things like that. does not seem like a wise choice to me.
i did not give my final presentation for my last class because i was out of town. i could have filmed myself and sent a dvd - which the prof asked for (that would have been the excellent thing to do) - but i did not because i was really busy and that would have been a lot of extra work. we are talking a difference of like 0.1 on the GPA, and i would not have learned any more had i done it.
sorry that was long and pointless
"I think so. I would perfection would be free from error, whereas excellence would be to the best of your ability."
Too bad this isn't an excellant sentance.
Allie, I thought you were an english major in college, didn't they teach you about dictionaries? www.m-w.com is a good one.
Post a Comment