One side always accuses the other of having too much of it; and by merely alleging it, you immediately denigrate the opponent’s relevance, weight and substantive import of the argument engaged in. It is a tactic often used in debate — of alleging that the other side has engaged in an “emotional” argument.
Showing it has been associated with weakness; admitting to it is tantamount to defeat. Yet, we all have that side, don’t we?
Human beings are not mere automatons built with computer chips and Spock-like demeanors. The Stoic, of course, has trained himself to deny that side of humanity; likewise, the Hindu priest, the Zen Buddhist, the warrior-brute. Civilization itself has, in more modern times, declared that the emotional side is psychologically healthy to exhibit; and concurrently, there exists and has arisen a countermovement which believes that the pendulum has swung too far and that “real men” (whatever they are) need to reestablish themselves.
Clearly, wherever one is on the discussion-spectrum of this issue, there is a time and place for the emotional side to manifest itself.
For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition necessitates filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, there is a relevant place for the emotional side. Yes, legal argumentation is important. Yes, a logical, sequential exposition of one’s case is needed. But in describing the impact of one’s medical condition, there is clearly a relevant place for the emotional side.
Contact a Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law, and discuss where and to what extent the emotional side of the process is appropriate.
Robert R. McGill, Lawyer