Which is more Val!d

[Najabat]

Friendz v hear two phrases commonly ,
1)First impression is the last impression.
2)All is well that ends well.
So which statement is more valid
Note:Intelligent and critical answers make gup shup interesting!

[I M Possible]

Both are valid, it is up to situations.

[Najabat]

Sir i ask about more valid i know both r valid!nwayz thanx 4 participation!

[I M Possible]

Originally Posted by Najabat

Sir i ask about more valid i know both r valid!nwayz thanx 4 participation!

Well i think i have elucidated that both are valid in different sort of situations. It depends.

1. Look, sometimes u make a bad impression on a person but later wid the passage of time, the person coe to know tht u r not that bad.
   
2. Sometimes everyting goes bad and bad and bad and bad.....for long...it ends well in the end. At last it ended ell, but is this well ending equally well for all?

Regards

[Najabat]

hmmm i get ur point sir!the thing in some case if u met a person first time and also last time then ur first impression is last impression.But in daily life scenerios its very rarely happens.but i totally agree with ur valued sugessions!Simlarly if u made a bad impression in first site its very tidious for some strict sorted nature persons to change his/her perception abt U!

[Khuram]

hmmm. first one is complete invalid. It is just an ordinary common notion and most of the times it just deceives those who follow this notion. Generally it is not possible to rightly judge the personality of any human at first sight. In the case of wise and intelligent humans, it may not be possible to fully understand them even over a very long period of interaction with them. Some people may not give their good impression in particular situations, though they might be able to perfom far better.

The second one does make some proper sense and in fact, Mr. William James, the founder of 'Pragmatism' ideology, is strong supporter of this second idea. But even the detailed study of this second idea would show many superficialities in it also. For example a corrupt person who becomes rich because of his dishonest attitude and corruption would also fall in this category because after all his 'end' of becoming rich is 'well'.

In short, decisions should not be based on first impression or end result etc. The better way is to take the decisions on the basis of thorough analysis of the situation.

Thanks!

[I M Possible]

Originally Posted by Khuram

In short, decisions should not be based on first impression or end result etc. The better way is to take the decisions on the basis of thorough analysis of the situation.

Thanks!

yeah that is what i was trying to convey !!!

[Qurratulain]

@Khuram

It's a long time i din't have any debate with you, but now i got free from my practice. my schedule is still stringent but, i'll be able to manage a debate atleast. So hold your breath.

And yes, start recollecting your arms, coz this time i'm going to have a strong army with me.

Originally Posted by Khuram

hmmm. first one is complete invalid.

According to a "theory of ideas" by an emmerging philosopher an idea or statement is completly invalid only when it is not practically applicable. While the first situation "first impression is last impression" is not completely invalid coz, it depends on the mental approach of the observer of the impression. If the observer belives on the statement he'll apply this statement in real life and so the statement will be practically applicable.

It is just an ordinary common notion and most of the times it just deceives those who follow this notion.

Please explain, either it decieves the observer or the person being observed???

Generally it is not possible to rightly judge the personality of any human at first sight.

Agree. (you scored a point)

In the case of wise and intelligent humans, it may not be possible to fully understand them even over a very long period of interaction with them.

What if both are intelligent? and what if both are not so?

Some people may not give their good impression in particular situations, though they might be able to perfom far better.

Yes, and this may because of, being un familier to the circumstances, or any physical or psychological factor.

The second one does make some proper sense and in fact, Mr. William James, the founder of 'Pragmatism' ideology, is strong supporter of this second idea. But even the detailed study of this second idea would show many superficialities in it also. For example a corrupt person who becomes rich because of his dishonest attitude and corruption would also fall in this category because after all his 'end' of becoming rich is 'well'.

You are taking only one side of his being rich. See the other side whereby, he decieves people (shows dishonesty), the other will get in trouble, and that's not 'well'.

In short, decisions should not be based on first impression or end result etc. The better way is to take the decisions on the basis of thorough analysis of the situation.

Agree, and i'd like to add a little more in it. Decisions should not be rigid at all, instead one should have some alternatives also, in case if the decision is not practically applicable, then one can move according to the situation.



Regards,

[Khuram]

@ Qurratulain

And yes, start recollecting your arms, coz this time i'm going to have a strong army with me.

Yes now your profile is really scaring due to which my army has run away. Therefore I alone will have to face the fear factoy.

According to a "theory of ideas" by an emmerging philosopher an idea or statement is completly invalid only when it is not practically applicable. While the first situation "first impression is last impression" is not completely invalid coz, it depends on the mental approach of the observer of the impression. If the observer belives on the statement he'll apply this statement in real life and so the statement will be practically applicable.

Well! I may not follow the theory of any 'emerging' or even 'established' philosopher but the 'theory of ideas' which you have referred, does make proper sense to me also. That 'theory of ideas' does not say that 'invalid ideas' are those which cannot be put to practical application. More precisely, according to that 'theory of ideas', those invalid ideas can be put to practical application. The only fault would be that the original purpose would not be accomplished through the practical application of such invalid ideas. Consider the following lines which are taken out of closing paragraph of that theory.

These second type of ideas are invalid because they cannot give the desired or expected results in a real situation. These ideas, however can be (but un-successfully) put to practical application in a real situation. The only thing is that the desired or expected results cannot be received in the real situation. The desired results cannot be taken but actually, even the unsuccessful attempt to practically implement these types of invalid ideas, can affect the material world negatively or positively. For example if a superstitious person wants to get some desired result lets say he wants a good crops in his agriculture land. He invalidly thinks that this objective can only be achieved if he kills any un-known person. Now suppose that he actually kills an un-known person but he does not get the desired results. In this case the desired result, although have not been received but the material world however have been affected in a negative way i.e. an innocent person has been unduly killed. Now suppose that after killing that un-known person, the superstitious person also gets the desired results. In this case, in fact the desired result is obtained not because the un-known person was killed; the successful desired results in this case are taken due to other objective scientific reasons, which may still be un-known to that superstitious person. So he can still think that the desired results have been taken due to the practical implementation of that idea of killing an un-known person.

So those who shall follow this notion would be able to take their decisions as per this notion. What I am saying is that those decisions, most probably be false and so fruitless. Those decisions would have negative implications also. I already have mentioned such reasons that personality cannot be rightly judged at first sight. In the case of a new member at this forum, my first impression about her was that might be she was a poetess. But now she is a senior member and so now I know that she is much more than a poetess. It means that my first impression was wrong in this example case. My point of view is that first impression generally tells only a few aspects of the personality of any person. If we are the follower this notion that "first impression is the last impression", then actually we wrongfully would generalize only those few aspects of personality and in this way if we take any decision as per our first impression, then most probably such a decision would be deceiving and misleading.

Please explain, either it decieves the observer or the person being observed???

It shall deceive the 'observer' because 'observer' shall take a wrong decision because of his incomplete understanding.

The person being observed would be 'suffered' by that wrong decision of 'observer' about him.

Agree. (you scored a point)

--- but am I given the 'point' ... in new point system...????

What if both are intelligent? and what if both are not so?

See that if both are really intelligent, then obviously they shall not give any importance to the first impressions. They shall try to understand each other more deeply and in this way, shall take the decisions on the basis of 'thorough analysis'.

Yes, and this may because of, being un familier to the circumstances, or any physical or psychological factor.

ok. agree....

You are taking only one side of his being rich. See the other side whereby, he decieves people (shows dishonesty), the other will get in trouble, and that's not 'well'.

It is you who is considering it not 'well'... Practical minded clever persons consider it all well because they consider the worth of outcome only from personal or selfish point of view.

According to William James even the religion would be considered true only if it offers certain practical benefits to the believer. See how far those people can go who are the supporters of this second notion of "all is well if end is well". For such a person, if a believer does not get any practical benefit out of his belief in religion, his belief, then, would be false!

There is famous story of how originally Japanese people adopted Buddhism. The Japanese Emperor had asked one person to adopt Buddism on experimental basis. That person happened to have got certain practical benefits after wards. As the experiment proved successful, so the Emperor asked his people to adopt Buddism.

These type of things are the 'end result' of the belief in the notion: "all is well if end is well". And now you please try to find the element of 'truth' in these type of things.

Agree, and i'd like to add a little more in it. Decisions should not be rigid at all, instead one should have some alternatives also, in case if the decision is not practically applicable, then one can move according to the situation.

ok and thanks.


Regards!