It seems a stretch to suggest that an action one performs to aid another necessarily is done in submission to that other's will and opposed to one's own desires.
I must be reading this wrong; I don't think you'd have posted it if my interpretation is correct.
I would argue that it comes down to a definitional issue between 'useful' and 'capable'; an individual viewed as 'capable' is known to be able to achieve that to which he applies himself - which might very well include doing work requested by another - and is in possession of "power and ability", while an individual who is 'useful' is "of some use or service" or "serving some purpose".
A carpenter who is properly trained is capable. His tools are useful.
I don't see how those ideas are mutually exclusive.
While your example illustrates the definitional difference between the terms, a carpenter's tools are not items open to being "capable", so I'm not sure it serves to address the distinction as it relates to your posted quotation. Perhaps you could provide me with another example?
Comments 3
It seems a stretch to suggest that an action one performs to aid another necessarily is done in submission to that other's will and opposed to one's own desires.
I must be reading this wrong; I don't think you'd have posted it if my interpretation is correct.
Reply
A carpenter who is properly trained is capable. His tools are useful.
Reply
While your example illustrates the definitional difference between the terms, a carpenter's tools are not items open to being "capable", so I'm not sure it serves to address the distinction as it relates to your posted quotation. Perhaps you could provide me with another example?
Reply
Leave a comment