Saturday, October 14, 2006
Who do I respect the most?
Since writing my last post, I've thought alot about who I respect the most, and why. The traditional concept of respect includes deference, in other words that you'd defer to that person's judgment over your own; for me to feel that for someone, they'd have to have a history of judgment superior to mine, and have me totally convinced that when they advised me their intention was to serve my best interests (rather than to manipulate me, or worse). For most folks, there'd be some older family members that qualified for this position; in MY family, sadly, I've seen little evidence of my best interests ever being considered, and NO evidence that any of them possess superior judgment, so that's out. Some of us have friends with such great track records of making the right choices that we'd trust theirs over ours; among MY friends, I'M the one with the best track record, so that's out too.
The deepest respect I can offer would be that any idea the recipient put forth that's other than what's already in my head would make me stop dead in my tracks and think it through out to 10 decimal places, even if it doesn't make sense to me at first, contradicts my worldview or seems a little crazy... or ALOT crazy. The ones I feel that for are the precious few whose intelligence, perception, knowledge, analytical ability, adherence to logic and facts over feelings, and grasp of the complex attributes of humans and the spiritual realm have knocked me out multiple times.
A famous example of such a person is Dilbert creator Scott Adams, who has given me eye-popping food for thought over and over and altered my perceptions of things up to and including the nature of reality... what a MIND that man has!! Respecting him as I do, when I see something he's written that seems nuts at first glance, like this
"If everyone exposed to a product likes it, the product will not succeed."
I don't shrug and move on to the next post, I open up my mind and keep reading. The explanation for his seemingly nonsensical statement, which he tells us he heard from "an experienced executive" and has since verified himself, is:
"The reason that a product 'everyone likes' will fail is because no one 'loves' it. The only thing that predicts success is passion, even if only 10% of the consumers have it. For example, I'm willing to bet that when the TV show Baywatch was tested, 90% of the people rolled their eyes and gave it a thumbs down. But I'll bet 10% of the test audience had tents in their pants. Bingo."
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2006/10/knowing_when_to.html
As soon as I read that, I couldn't believe I hadn't seen it before... which is the best sign of a powerful truth, in my experience. It makes perfect sense; most people don't have time/$ to spare on something new that they just LIKE, when there are so many things they LOVE that they want more of, and established likes filling in the gaps... they need to love a new thing to be willing to pursue it.
I'll finish off with a description of why my most respected friend has that honor; we'll call her "Jane":
It started when we were in college; the psycho best friend of my then-boyfriend used the weeks between the beginning of the romance and when my bf brought me into their social circle to badmouth me incessantly to everyone in the group... although he'd never even MET me. They all bought it enough for my original reception to be chilly; the first big breakthrough came when Jane and I crossed paths on campus one day, and she announced out of the blue that she was sorry she'd listened to anything Psycho had said about me, as it obviously wasn't true and she should've known better than to trust anyone behaving that way... how many people of college age, or ANY age, have the backbone to denounce the official party line like that, or even the discernment to realize that it's in error?
A few years later, she was involved with a man that she didn't care too much about, but who from her descriptions of their time together was unmistakably falling for her big-time; when I pointed out how he apparently felt, and told her that because of it she needed to either make clear to him how SHE felt or end the relationship, she got defensive and nasty, with the upshot being that I was an idiot with no idea how things were between her and him, and how dare I tell her what to do... she even hung up on me. A couple of weeks later, she somehow found the courage to call me back and tell me that he'd asked her to MARRY him, and thus that I was totally right, she was totally wrong, and furthermore her prior behavior had been inexcusable regardless... could YOU have done that?
About that time, she began a protracted quest to study all facets Christianity, with the intention of finding which church best represented God and the Bible; she went at it full-tilt, even being born-again for a while... and eventually turned away from a lifetime of organized religion and devoted herself to studying the Bible in-depth and contemplating God in her own innovative, insightful way. Equally as amazing, at no point did she try to drag anyone else along with her, whether Christian or "heathen" (eg ME), or look down on those who didn't agree with whatever her flavor of belief was at the time. She married a pagan man, and has bent over backwards to learn about his beliefs, to accommodate them on holidays and such, and has incorporated much of them into her own belief system (she sees no conflict in that-she believes that God created karma and other forces to serve His plan). AND, since I became a mystic, she's taken endless hours to discuss and ponder MY version of metaphysics, and to help me understand her interpretation of God and the Bible as part of my studies of Christianity; if there IS a God, she's done Him proud.
The darkest chapter in our relationship came when she suddenly and inexplicably stopped calling, returning my calls, or picking up the phone; I eventually got a brief, cold LETTER from her basically telling me to get lost. Fast forward several years; a voice from the past timidly called my name in the middle of a department store, and there she was, looking scared but hopeful. It was evident that she was eager to "get me back," and because she'd been such a good friend I took the plunge; in return, she admitted that what she'd done to me was the biggest mistake of her life... one so huge that she could never find the courage to contact me to try to make amends, and didn't know if there could even BE amends. It turned out that it'd been a king-sized replay of what happened in college; a couple of guys who barely knew me had trash-talked me to her, and she took their opinions over her own and ended our friendship. It didn't take her long to realize she'd done something dreadful, but it was too late; in contrition, she took a vow to learn to think for herself and do so from then on. Determined to make the RIGHT choices rather than just digging her heels in with whatever popped into her head, she developed the ability to gather all the facts, think them through thoroughly and objectively, come to the logical conclusion (which all too few people can do well, or at all), and stick to it no matter what nonsense got tossed at her... she still credits ME with indirectly forcing her do this and thus to become an adult.
When she told me what had happened all those years ago, she didn't spare herself at all; she made no excuses, she didn't even give reasons that might have lessened her guilt, she made it clear that she'd been stupid, blind, weak, and cowardly, and that was that. She announced her intention to spend the rest of her life making it up to me, if I'd allow her to; she wasn't just talking, either, she's been doing it and continues to do it... because of course I forgave her, as was only proper under the circumstances.
And finally: She revealed that a few years before, she'd looked at her friends and realized that the majority of them weren't the sort of quality people she wanted to be around, be influenced by and judged in part by being associated with; she hadn't fought with any of them, she hadn't stopped liking them, they hadn't mistreated her or done some terrible thing, it's just that they didn't have the sorts of virtues she'd struggled to exemplify, and in fact weren't particularly nice people... so, although she'd been friends with them since college, she took a giant step away from most of the people in her life, and focused on finding and maintaining relationships with people that she could point to with pride and name as her friends. Can you imagine the strength and courage it took to do that, not to mention the intellectual rigor necessary to alert her that the facts weren't adding up to an optimal result, and to allow her to think totally out of the box and come to an unheard-of but correct conclusion?
THAT is what it takes to earn my deepest respect.
The deepest respect I can offer would be that any idea the recipient put forth that's other than what's already in my head would make me stop dead in my tracks and think it through out to 10 decimal places, even if it doesn't make sense to me at first, contradicts my worldview or seems a little crazy... or ALOT crazy. The ones I feel that for are the precious few whose intelligence, perception, knowledge, analytical ability, adherence to logic and facts over feelings, and grasp of the complex attributes of humans and the spiritual realm have knocked me out multiple times.
A famous example of such a person is Dilbert creator Scott Adams, who has given me eye-popping food for thought over and over and altered my perceptions of things up to and including the nature of reality... what a MIND that man has!! Respecting him as I do, when I see something he's written that seems nuts at first glance, like this
"If everyone exposed to a product likes it, the product will not succeed."
I don't shrug and move on to the next post, I open up my mind and keep reading. The explanation for his seemingly nonsensical statement, which he tells us he heard from "an experienced executive" and has since verified himself, is:
"The reason that a product 'everyone likes' will fail is because no one 'loves' it. The only thing that predicts success is passion, even if only 10% of the consumers have it. For example, I'm willing to bet that when the TV show Baywatch was tested, 90% of the people rolled their eyes and gave it a thumbs down. But I'll bet 10% of the test audience had tents in their pants. Bingo."
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2006/10/knowing_when_to.html
As soon as I read that, I couldn't believe I hadn't seen it before... which is the best sign of a powerful truth, in my experience. It makes perfect sense; most people don't have time/$ to spare on something new that they just LIKE, when there are so many things they LOVE that they want more of, and established likes filling in the gaps... they need to love a new thing to be willing to pursue it.
I'll finish off with a description of why my most respected friend has that honor; we'll call her "Jane":
It started when we were in college; the psycho best friend of my then-boyfriend used the weeks between the beginning of the romance and when my bf brought me into their social circle to badmouth me incessantly to everyone in the group... although he'd never even MET me. They all bought it enough for my original reception to be chilly; the first big breakthrough came when Jane and I crossed paths on campus one day, and she announced out of the blue that she was sorry she'd listened to anything Psycho had said about me, as it obviously wasn't true and she should've known better than to trust anyone behaving that way... how many people of college age, or ANY age, have the backbone to denounce the official party line like that, or even the discernment to realize that it's in error?
A few years later, she was involved with a man that she didn't care too much about, but who from her descriptions of their time together was unmistakably falling for her big-time; when I pointed out how he apparently felt, and told her that because of it she needed to either make clear to him how SHE felt or end the relationship, she got defensive and nasty, with the upshot being that I was an idiot with no idea how things were between her and him, and how dare I tell her what to do... she even hung up on me. A couple of weeks later, she somehow found the courage to call me back and tell me that he'd asked her to MARRY him, and thus that I was totally right, she was totally wrong, and furthermore her prior behavior had been inexcusable regardless... could YOU have done that?
About that time, she began a protracted quest to study all facets Christianity, with the intention of finding which church best represented God and the Bible; she went at it full-tilt, even being born-again for a while... and eventually turned away from a lifetime of organized religion and devoted herself to studying the Bible in-depth and contemplating God in her own innovative, insightful way. Equally as amazing, at no point did she try to drag anyone else along with her, whether Christian or "heathen" (eg ME), or look down on those who didn't agree with whatever her flavor of belief was at the time. She married a pagan man, and has bent over backwards to learn about his beliefs, to accommodate them on holidays and such, and has incorporated much of them into her own belief system (she sees no conflict in that-she believes that God created karma and other forces to serve His plan). AND, since I became a mystic, she's taken endless hours to discuss and ponder MY version of metaphysics, and to help me understand her interpretation of God and the Bible as part of my studies of Christianity; if there IS a God, she's done Him proud.
The darkest chapter in our relationship came when she suddenly and inexplicably stopped calling, returning my calls, or picking up the phone; I eventually got a brief, cold LETTER from her basically telling me to get lost. Fast forward several years; a voice from the past timidly called my name in the middle of a department store, and there she was, looking scared but hopeful. It was evident that she was eager to "get me back," and because she'd been such a good friend I took the plunge; in return, she admitted that what she'd done to me was the biggest mistake of her life... one so huge that she could never find the courage to contact me to try to make amends, and didn't know if there could even BE amends. It turned out that it'd been a king-sized replay of what happened in college; a couple of guys who barely knew me had trash-talked me to her, and she took their opinions over her own and ended our friendship. It didn't take her long to realize she'd done something dreadful, but it was too late; in contrition, she took a vow to learn to think for herself and do so from then on. Determined to make the RIGHT choices rather than just digging her heels in with whatever popped into her head, she developed the ability to gather all the facts, think them through thoroughly and objectively, come to the logical conclusion (which all too few people can do well, or at all), and stick to it no matter what nonsense got tossed at her... she still credits ME with indirectly forcing her do this and thus to become an adult.
When she told me what had happened all those years ago, she didn't spare herself at all; she made no excuses, she didn't even give reasons that might have lessened her guilt, she made it clear that she'd been stupid, blind, weak, and cowardly, and that was that. She announced her intention to spend the rest of her life making it up to me, if I'd allow her to; she wasn't just talking, either, she's been doing it and continues to do it... because of course I forgave her, as was only proper under the circumstances.
And finally: She revealed that a few years before, she'd looked at her friends and realized that the majority of them weren't the sort of quality people she wanted to be around, be influenced by and judged in part by being associated with; she hadn't fought with any of them, she hadn't stopped liking them, they hadn't mistreated her or done some terrible thing, it's just that they didn't have the sorts of virtues she'd struggled to exemplify, and in fact weren't particularly nice people... so, although she'd been friends with them since college, she took a giant step away from most of the people in her life, and focused on finding and maintaining relationships with people that she could point to with pride and name as her friends. Can you imagine the strength and courage it took to do that, not to mention the intellectual rigor necessary to alert her that the facts weren't adding up to an optimal result, and to allow her to think totally out of the box and come to an unheard-of but correct conclusion?
THAT is what it takes to earn my deepest respect.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Who should you respect?
Ask most people that question, and they give an immediate answer that's essentially a list of every person, or category thereof, in their lives; family, friends, coworkers, neighbors, you name it. If you ask them WHY they respect those they listed, you'll get a blank look. If you ask them if they're sure all of those people DESERVE respect, you'll get reactions ranging from shock to confusion to anger. If you ask them what analysis they did for each of those people to determine their respect-worthiness, they'll look at you like you're a raving lunatic, and express horror at the idea of actually seeing if people QUALIFY to be respected before giving them respect and the benefits thereof.
WHY? Why is it such an outrageous thought that we shouldn't just give respect indiscriminately to everyone we know, that we should reserve it for those who are WORTHY, who have EARNED it? Do we as a culture have the misguided idea that we're so special that anyone in our orbit magically becomes respect-worthy? Or, is it that we've inexplicably decided that respect has to automatically go along with any relationship beyond bare acquaintance? Certainly, all too many folks use "respect" to just mean that they like the person they're referring to, or at least don't DISlike them; aside from this being foolish, it ignores the unfortunate fact that alot of charming-but-evil people, or on the other hand sweet-but-dopey people, are totally likable but NOT worthy of respect.
What difference does it make? Can't we just say we feel however we want about anyone we want? Sure, we can assign feelings to people on a whim, or at random, but what would be the point? Words MEAN things; when we use them we influence the opinions of others and even our own inner views, and "respect" is one of the strongest words we can use about another person... to toss it out with every name you mention is just as wrong as to announce that you feel, say, DISGUST for those folks, because both of these words make powerful statements about their subjects-the concept is the same whether you're using a positive or negative term. If we don't have any standards for who we respect, the word becomes meaningless; it seems like a sweet New Age-y idea to respect EVERYONE, but that benefits the unworthy and takes away benefit from the worthy... far from ideal.
Let me be clear: I'm NOT saying that we shouldn't TREAT everyone with respect (unless they're jerks), or that we shouldn't respect people's rights, whether to privacy, to express opinions, or whatever; those uses of the word "respect" refer to forms of courtesy, which isn't the topic. And, I'm not saying that you shouldn't show respect for your elders, your boss, or whoever else is "above you"; heck, even if you perceive a person in this category as being an IDIOT you should still show them respect if failure to do so can cause problems. What I AM saying is that if you claim to respect someone you should actually FEEL respect towards that person, as per the definition
"a feeling or attitude of admiration and deference toward somebody or something"
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/respect.html
and that if you have that feeling it should be because they DESERVE it, not just because you haven't noticed anything glaringly wrong with them yet.
So; what sort of people are worthy of admiration and DEFERENCE? Those who have superior abilities, achievements, intellect or wisdom, and those who've made a major effort to accomplish noble ends or to be virtuous; yes, some of those terms are open to interpretation, and that's as it should be, because YOU are the one who has to judge who deserves YOUR respect. Naturally, there are all sorts of impressive folks who should have the respect of EVERY reasonable person, but most people aren't that great, nor are they 1-dimensional, so you have to look at all the facts and decide who should have your respect, whose abilities you'll respect without respecting them as people (such as when someone is a turd but a great singer or athlete), and who should just be treated with respect without being respectED. These analyses can change over time, both as you learn new things about the potential respectees and as your own circumstances change; if you take up gourmet cooking, you'll likely gain a new respect for chefs, and if you become better at something than those you respected when THEY were better, your respect from them may fade or die (we tend to not respect those we see as below us in some way; how we see our equals varies). The tricky part is not being influenced by how much you (dis)like someone; you might despise a person for being too different from you, or too similar, but if they have inarguable achievements they still deserve respect for them, and if they don't have objectively bad points countering that (admit it, you sometimes dislike people who are NOT objectively bad) they deserve to be respected as people as well... and, on the flip side, someone you like, or even love, could easily NOT deserve respect.
Despite all I've said, are you appalled at the suggestion that someone you care about might not be worthy of respect? Try this; pick the name of one of those folks and then complete the following sentence; "This person should be respected because..." Can you come up with anything that would cause an objective viewer to respect them, or even anything you'd honestly claim as a valid reason for YOU to respect them (you might admire their ability to belch the alphabet or find the cutest shoes at a sale, but are those things truly worthy of respect)? Unless you hang out with a pretty unusual crowd, made up of PhD's, heroes and great artists (etc), most of those you know are average in every way, and just do their unexceptional jobs, look out for their homes and families, and try to have a little fun with whatever time and $ they have to spare; they're undoubtedly nice folks, enjoyable to be around, kind to animals and such, but it takes more than that to earn respect.
With that said, you probably DO know at least a few people for whom an objective case can be made that they deserve respect; you might think that they'd be universally respected, but you'd be surprised at how differently others would see them... the personal nature of giving respect means that people use their own beliefs and preferences (and emotions, sadly) to decide what qualities are respect-worthy, and that leads to a wide range of views. Do you know a single mom who's working long hours to provide for her kids? *I* respect that kind of effort and sacrifice; some folks see providing for one's family as just part of living, though, and not as something special, and some would even look down on her for not having a man. How about a stay-at-home mom who gave up her career to make sure her kids aren't raised by strangers? Some consider that noble; others consider it selfish, even contemptible (ask any s-a-h mom how she gets treated at parties full of career types). Do you know a lady who sings opera? You probably respect her talent, and *I* would too even though I hate opera; plenty of hard rock fans would turn up their noses at her, though. Do you know a man who's the best rock-climber in your city? Some would respect that, some would think he's crazy, and some would see climbing rocks as too lowbrow to bother about.
What group a person belongs to affects how they apportion respect, too: You and your friends might have great respect for the member of your gang who's the best at shooting hoops, but how much respect would a PRO player have for that person? You might respect everyone in your church because they're dedicated to your faith; those of a different faith, or none, won't see that as cause to respect them. There are countless different theories as to what the ideal qualities are for a person to possess, many of which are related to race, gender, sexual orientation or country of origin; if you embody those qualities, you'll probably be respected by members of that category... if not, you probably won't.
My final point is about that part of the traditional definition of respect that doesn't get acknowledged much these days; deference. How many people do you respect so deeply that you'll actually DEFER to them? Before you answer, here's a refresher as to the definition:
"To submit to the opinion, wishes, or decision of another through respect or in recognition of his or her authority, knowledge, or judgment"
http://www.answers.com/defer&r=67
How many people do you know that if they told you that you needed to change something about yourself or your life, or pick a different path than you'd intended, you'd do it their way, not argue or debate the issue but just agree and do it? THOSE are the people that you REALLY respect; how does that # compare to the # of people you thought of when you read the title of this post?
WHY? Why is it such an outrageous thought that we shouldn't just give respect indiscriminately to everyone we know, that we should reserve it for those who are WORTHY, who have EARNED it? Do we as a culture have the misguided idea that we're so special that anyone in our orbit magically becomes respect-worthy? Or, is it that we've inexplicably decided that respect has to automatically go along with any relationship beyond bare acquaintance? Certainly, all too many folks use "respect" to just mean that they like the person they're referring to, or at least don't DISlike them; aside from this being foolish, it ignores the unfortunate fact that alot of charming-but-evil people, or on the other hand sweet-but-dopey people, are totally likable but NOT worthy of respect.
What difference does it make? Can't we just say we feel however we want about anyone we want? Sure, we can assign feelings to people on a whim, or at random, but what would be the point? Words MEAN things; when we use them we influence the opinions of others and even our own inner views, and "respect" is one of the strongest words we can use about another person... to toss it out with every name you mention is just as wrong as to announce that you feel, say, DISGUST for those folks, because both of these words make powerful statements about their subjects-the concept is the same whether you're using a positive or negative term. If we don't have any standards for who we respect, the word becomes meaningless; it seems like a sweet New Age-y idea to respect EVERYONE, but that benefits the unworthy and takes away benefit from the worthy... far from ideal.
Let me be clear: I'm NOT saying that we shouldn't TREAT everyone with respect (unless they're jerks), or that we shouldn't respect people's rights, whether to privacy, to express opinions, or whatever; those uses of the word "respect" refer to forms of courtesy, which isn't the topic. And, I'm not saying that you shouldn't show respect for your elders, your boss, or whoever else is "above you"; heck, even if you perceive a person in this category as being an IDIOT you should still show them respect if failure to do so can cause problems. What I AM saying is that if you claim to respect someone you should actually FEEL respect towards that person, as per the definition
"a feeling or attitude of admiration and deference toward somebody or something"
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/respect.html
and that if you have that feeling it should be because they DESERVE it, not just because you haven't noticed anything glaringly wrong with them yet.
So; what sort of people are worthy of admiration and DEFERENCE? Those who have superior abilities, achievements, intellect or wisdom, and those who've made a major effort to accomplish noble ends or to be virtuous; yes, some of those terms are open to interpretation, and that's as it should be, because YOU are the one who has to judge who deserves YOUR respect. Naturally, there are all sorts of impressive folks who should have the respect of EVERY reasonable person, but most people aren't that great, nor are they 1-dimensional, so you have to look at all the facts and decide who should have your respect, whose abilities you'll respect without respecting them as people (such as when someone is a turd but a great singer or athlete), and who should just be treated with respect without being respectED. These analyses can change over time, both as you learn new things about the potential respectees and as your own circumstances change; if you take up gourmet cooking, you'll likely gain a new respect for chefs, and if you become better at something than those you respected when THEY were better, your respect from them may fade or die (we tend to not respect those we see as below us in some way; how we see our equals varies). The tricky part is not being influenced by how much you (dis)like someone; you might despise a person for being too different from you, or too similar, but if they have inarguable achievements they still deserve respect for them, and if they don't have objectively bad points countering that (admit it, you sometimes dislike people who are NOT objectively bad) they deserve to be respected as people as well... and, on the flip side, someone you like, or even love, could easily NOT deserve respect.
Despite all I've said, are you appalled at the suggestion that someone you care about might not be worthy of respect? Try this; pick the name of one of those folks and then complete the following sentence; "This person should be respected because..." Can you come up with anything that would cause an objective viewer to respect them, or even anything you'd honestly claim as a valid reason for YOU to respect them (you might admire their ability to belch the alphabet or find the cutest shoes at a sale, but are those things truly worthy of respect)? Unless you hang out with a pretty unusual crowd, made up of PhD's, heroes and great artists (etc), most of those you know are average in every way, and just do their unexceptional jobs, look out for their homes and families, and try to have a little fun with whatever time and $ they have to spare; they're undoubtedly nice folks, enjoyable to be around, kind to animals and such, but it takes more than that to earn respect.
With that said, you probably DO know at least a few people for whom an objective case can be made that they deserve respect; you might think that they'd be universally respected, but you'd be surprised at how differently others would see them... the personal nature of giving respect means that people use their own beliefs and preferences (and emotions, sadly) to decide what qualities are respect-worthy, and that leads to a wide range of views. Do you know a single mom who's working long hours to provide for her kids? *I* respect that kind of effort and sacrifice; some folks see providing for one's family as just part of living, though, and not as something special, and some would even look down on her for not having a man. How about a stay-at-home mom who gave up her career to make sure her kids aren't raised by strangers? Some consider that noble; others consider it selfish, even contemptible (ask any s-a-h mom how she gets treated at parties full of career types). Do you know a lady who sings opera? You probably respect her talent, and *I* would too even though I hate opera; plenty of hard rock fans would turn up their noses at her, though. Do you know a man who's the best rock-climber in your city? Some would respect that, some would think he's crazy, and some would see climbing rocks as too lowbrow to bother about.
What group a person belongs to affects how they apportion respect, too: You and your friends might have great respect for the member of your gang who's the best at shooting hoops, but how much respect would a PRO player have for that person? You might respect everyone in your church because they're dedicated to your faith; those of a different faith, or none, won't see that as cause to respect them. There are countless different theories as to what the ideal qualities are for a person to possess, many of which are related to race, gender, sexual orientation or country of origin; if you embody those qualities, you'll probably be respected by members of that category... if not, you probably won't.
My final point is about that part of the traditional definition of respect that doesn't get acknowledged much these days; deference. How many people do you respect so deeply that you'll actually DEFER to them? Before you answer, here's a refresher as to the definition:
"To submit to the opinion, wishes, or decision of another through respect or in recognition of his or her authority, knowledge, or judgment"
http://www.answers.com/defer&r=67
How many people do you know that if they told you that you needed to change something about yourself or your life, or pick a different path than you'd intended, you'd do it their way, not argue or debate the issue but just agree and do it? THOSE are the people that you REALLY respect; how does that # compare to the # of people you thought of when you read the title of this post?
