Sunday, September 18, 2005!
promos count: 2 wks more.
tick tock goes the clock.
***
was reading about SUNK COSTS in sloman today. and realised that what sloman said is true. u shouldnt base your future decisions in what already happened in the past, especially something that u can never get back again. by doing so, u are actually constraining yourself to lesser options in the future. so why constrain yourself for something that no longer exists?
however, sunk costs is a concept that man is still unable to grasp. perhaps its just huaman nature to always look back before we move forward. the heartach of putting something u've put so much effort in down, even though u know its no longer good for you. for example, after staying in a relationship for 10 years, you realise that u no longer love a person. but many would look back at the 10 years and think that its a waste to just throw all of it away. i mean 10 YEARS?! yup. but lets look at it in the other way. u cant marry a person u no longer love. so what for hang on to it, even though it cost u 10 yrs of ur life-your youth. those 10 years are sunk cost. your youth is sunk cost. heck. move on with life and stop looking back. if u hang on to the relationship, u might lose the chance of meeting someone better in the future. u are constraining yourself from such a possibility.
let bygones be bygones, let sunk costs be sunk costs.
but then again, i stress that this is a different case for marriages as marriages involves much more, such as responsiblity. :)
never knew i could learn so much more from a econs textbk! but why is 'sunk cost' such a small portion of econs only?! summore in an unimportant chapter!
grrr. life is never nice to me.
bah. *scrooge-mode*
hahahaha
love, Ruth
*MUG HARD YA'ALL!!! :)
7:50 AM
_____________________
