Is it better to be Interesting or useful – Useful

The person who proposed this topic is very clever and I’m surprised this even appears as issue requiring any debate. In my opinion, it is far better to be useful than interesting. Persons who are useful will always attract interesting people. Interesting people may or may not attract useful people. Or another way of looking at this is, is it better to be entertained or helped?

I think most folks would select helped without question. It is human nature to be concerned with basic welfare as compared to being amused as a high priority item. But if one thinks about it, is this choice really that far-fetched? I would ask the reader to consider the last time they saw the dentist, the mechanic and mail carrier. All three persons serve a useful service but are they interesting?

The odds are you don’t know because other than pay the bill or have the minimum amount of interaction with them, the only expectation is whatever service is being provided, will be handled in a correct and expeditious fashion and a price charged (if there is one) will be fair. So it is not necessary to be entertained by these folks or to entertain them in order to have them do their jobs as expected.

Now that the world hasn’t stopped spinning on its axis, why would one want to be interesting? It could be this is just a person’s nature. There are those who delight in keeping others amused, not that there’s anything wrong with that. Or it may be that in being interesting it makes it easier to work with folks who are useful.

One reason for this debate of interesting vs. useful is even coming up for comparison is television, movies and believe it or not, video games. The younger generation has gotten spoiled and all they need to do is to tell their parents or guardians that they’re bored and all sorts of elaborate steps need to be taken to keep them entertained. Dvd players, CD players, MP3 players and video computers are normal items given to the children to keep them out of trouble, all of which provide instant entertainment so camping in the woods and living off the land is viewed more as a punishment than a treat.

Consequently I’d be willing to bet that respondents who are in their early 20’s or so would definitely accept entertained over usefulness. So the bottom line is if you have to choose between the two, I’d go for useful. It’ll be better in the long run.