I have often been told that I tend to be a ‘glass half empty’ kind of person. coming from the proverbial expression describing a perspective of either pessimism or optimism. I don’t know, I guess that sometimes I do tend towards a more pessimistic perspective to things. but I wonder if maybe, when we talk about a glass half empty, or for that matter even a glass half full, if we’re not missing the actual point. depending on the context, on the situation, it might be a good thing to have a pessimistic perspective. such a perspective might help better analysis or better motivation towards improvement. it might not too. it might do just the opposite. but having an optimistic perspective of the situation might mean that what can, and maybe even should, be changed is simply being accepted and coloured in pretty, so that it is easier to bear… which isn’t a good thing either. but I think that the whole expression misses the point in that, it doesn’t really matter what our perspective is. the glass is at half point. full or empty, it is at half point. and if change is wanted, no matter how it is perceived, it needs action. whether the glass is half empty or half full, three quarters empty or whatever, there are questions that beg asking. are the contents of the glass what they should be? is more, or less of the contents required? does the glass need to be changed for a bigger or a smaller one? what action is required to create the change and what will ensure change to what is perceived as positive? if you are happy with your glass half empty, it doesn’t matter what your perspective … sometimes a glass half empty is better than a glass that is totally empty … or a glass that is completely full. I don’t know, regardless of how full my glass is, I don’t think I could put an optimistic slant on it if it was poison that my glass was full of … no matter how hard I tried …