14 January 2014

To burn or not to burn?

That is the question. Whether 'tis better to leave the path back open, or, in burning it down, to force oneself onward with no hope of retreat? (as Shakespeare didn't say).

8 comments:

Elephant's Child said...

Being a decidedly belt and braces person (though I wear neither) I am always in favour of an escape route. Or two.

Andrew MacLaren-Scott said...

Yes, trying not to burn bridges is a good policy, I reckon, even if sometimes the temptation to go back is best avoided. Ah well... maybe we don't really have freewill anyway... It is what it is and we are what we are... but did we have to be?

Sean Jeating said...

I was pondering about one of the many possible answers.
I repeat: many . . .

While pondering I was aware your question could be meant as an essential one.

So, yes. Sometimes we need to force ourselves onward! Most bridges are worth not be destroyed, though. For several reasons.

Andrew MacLaren-Scott said...

We can never really go back anyway, Sean. But nothing essential really. Just idle pondering.

CherryPie said...

It is always best to leave our options open!

Claude said...

Not necessary. Go one step, turn back and look. It's already gone!

Syncopated Eyeball said...

If a bridge no longer serves it's purpose, unless it is exceptionally beautiful, I would destroy it.

Andrew MacLaren-Scott said...

The problem is knowing if it would be better to leave the possibility to go back open though, or to remove it from temptation, although we never can really go back anyway, but we can restart, each morning, I hope.