What is the logic after we pretty much deal with everything in life?

Webby_Songdo

This is not directly related to LSAT but then at the same token, I believe it is because dealing is a big part of being a lawyer.

I always thought relationship is a deal; however, as I do more deals and deals, I believe this process is unending with the same "BS" people every time.

I am wondering what the logic is after the "deal."

What I am asking is if we have a logic behind our philosophy as "Relationship is deal"

Could we say "Dealing is bulldozing?"

It seems like there is a certain extent we have to agree to this deal even though it may be unfair. If that is the case, can we just bulldoze whoever and whatever -- institution, organization, people, one-man entity, family?

In the Art of the Deal by Donald Trump, he said we should be able to kick a family out if the tenant does not pay rent; however, if we read Stephen Covey's 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Covey pretty much states to not bulldoze a relationship.

Please offer your thought here. Thank you! (:

c00p3r2001

I think relationships and your identity fall into the grey area of life. Your goals, circumstances and those of the people you deal with have infinite divisibility that make no two situations exactly alike- I remember an LSAT stim that talked about riddled basins of attraction and how even undetectable minute changes can make it impossible to repeat an experiment because the starting conditions can never be replicated exactly. I believe those things don't lend as well to logic- or broad generalizations from people who aren't involved in your life (sorry, Don). So to me, there is no logic, just comparing the relative weight of the things you know and the things you want.

1stWorldProblems

I think life is mostly a bunch of concession points.

JDream2025

What did I just read? LSAT, are you taking over the forums, too, now?