On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 21:45:41 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John) Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Btms
It is not uncommon, ime, for values to begin with a purpose and end up with
a rule with no purpose.
I've met a lot of those which made no sense to me, often from nurses who
had learnt the 'rule' but never the reason for it so applied it all the
time instead of 'when necessary'.
Yes, I find that sort of attitude wearing too.
However, my mother taught me (or possibly just told me - I suspect I
wouldn't be taught such a thing) that there are times when there _are_
good reasons for a rule, but you haven't the knowledge - or, sometimes,
the time to learn - to _understand_ the reason.
I was thinking in particular of certain things I was told to do with my
first born in the maternity hospital which made no sense to me at all and
seemed counterproductive so I ignored them and I've tended to be sceptical
about such things ever since.
Much has changed over the years regarding the 'rules' for new babies but I
was surprised to hear this same instruction - strip the baby, change its
nappy then dress her again before feeding - given (by a nurse) to d#2 about
her 2nd daughter. When the doctor arrived I asked her about it and she said
'Oh, that only applies if the baby is asleep, we need her awake so I can
see if she's feeding properly'. It only took 32 years to find someone who
knew the reason for that one.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
IIRR, she gave as example certain computing matters, where she just
wanted me to tell her how to do things, not why (i. e. not how the steps
to achieve the desired result did so).
How unlike my father. One of my teenaged nephews tried to teach him the
basics but was frustrated because the old man kept wanting to know 'why'.
He used a computer for the next 25 years but was never quite comfortable
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.