First of all: No one says “half empty” when asked this question. No one thinks of it as a full glass that got emptied halfway – everyone thinks of it as a glass that contains half its volume with liquid.
But as Socrates said: that ain’t the point.
The POINT is… actually, imma be honest here – I forgot what the point was. I saved this as a draft with just the title and that first line and now that I’ve come back to it I don’t remember which stick of dynamite I was fixin to blow your mind with exactly – but that there’s some true shiz about the empty part.
I think maybe I was going to go into detail about – oh – you know what, I think I got it – it was about how something only being “half full” of its potential capacity isn’t an “optimists” view. The statement should say “is the glass full or empty” and the fact that it’s contents is only half-either-of-those is implied. Because saying something is only half full is still a negative view. Or something.
Meh. Abort this one. This one doesn’t count. I lost its brilliance in the mix of probably coming up with something even more astounding and the roots of this one got fogged out. I regret the error.
Leave a Reply