Talk:Is the glass half empty or half full?/Archive

Half Full - Using Mathematics to prove it

It makes sense to define empty as having a value of zero and full as having a value of one. Therefore, the glass is half full, because it is simply half of one, which equals 0.5. It cannot be half empty because half empty is equal to half of zero which is equal to zero. So to say the glass is half empty is incorrect because why would you bother saying you've got half of nothing?. A better way of using the term "half empty" is to say that the glass is "half way to being empty". The term "half full" is the most appropriate. Let me know what you think.

It's half-empty

This article reads like one of those jokes I keep getting in my email. Sorry to whoever wrote it first.--OleMurder 21:17, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Of course the true answer is that the glass is twice as big as necessary.--Anonyme User.

By the way, I think the glass is half empty. Not because I'm pessimistic, but 'cuz the glass wasn't filled before the water came, o'course! The oxygen's the glass's "national natives", since "empty" often is just, air! ;) By the way, note, I'm not optimistic either...I'm realistic. Guess what? I'm never disappointed.--OleMurder 22:32, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

---

The glass isn't half empty or half full, it's being and nothingness.

So a glass which could contain 150ml, currently containing 150ml, is being without nothingness? Drivel. OOOOOOOOHHHHHH shnap -anonymous

It's half full

And thats mathmaticaly proven James' dissproof of pessimism

The contents of the glass can change the whole perception of the question and answer. If the contents are undesirable the (Half full) scenario could be considered pessimistic and the (Half empty) scenario optimistic.

Please stop giving answers

The point to this question is that the answer is more a matter of point of view than empirical experience. Please don't try to add "the answer" by claiming that it is always half full or that it is half full if is was formerly empty and half empty if it was formerly full. No one ever cares if a particular glass is half full or half empty. It is a hypothetical glass used strictly rhetorically. --Tysto 01:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Technically, there is a correct answer to the question, but it varies from case to case (and is now given in the article). Whether there is such an answer doesn't matter - the question as posed is an idiomatic term, and as such does not rely on the answer to have its necessary effect. Grutness...wha? 00:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

• There is not a correct answer to the question. It is a philosophical question, not an empirical one. It has nothing to do with a glass of water. It is a means of demonstrating that some situations can be seen in different ways, that there may be a silver lining in the storm cloud. --Tysto 06:31, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

There is BOTH a philosophical answer and an empirical answer. The empirical answer will depend on how what most people prefer to name the glass, and when they do. Literature on the psychological phenomena called "framing" has investigated this

• There cannot be an empirical answer (observable and measurable) because there is no glass. The question merely points out that there are two ways of viewing the situation. If your boss tries to pressure you to do something you think is unethical and asks "do you know which side your bread is buttered on?" only an idiot would answer "the top side, I guess." --Tysto 17:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

What's the difference?

I find it obvious that the correct answer is yes. If you want me to be more specific: both. The glass is half full if and only if it is half empty. They both convey exactly the same information. Personally I say that it is half full because it is shorter and easier to say. It seems like it would work better if one asks what it isn't, as the glass not being full is clearly different information then not being empty. If someone remarks that it is not full, they probably thought that that was more remarkable then it not being empty, and are, therefore, an optimist. The same, or rather the opposite, applies to a pessimist.

The idea that people use this expression is totally rediculus to hear. It means nothing to me if I am trying be a realist. It is simply a 50/50 situation that people demonstate to make me feel positive and yet fail to due to me knowing it is still 50/50 dispite my outlook. Realism and science is the only way to live life. Sides, have you ever noticed that people always say be more positive when you un-lucky; it has a tendancy to make you feel less like being positive that ever. It is annoying to hear. I determin all this is pure psycho-drivel and I wish people would respect my philosophy.

Actually, they are both denotatively correct, but could be, as previously stated, connotatively different.

point of view

Wow reading your different point of view about half full or half empty. I think for me, the point here is to determined what type of a person more likely you are with optimistic or pessimistic. if you answer half full meaning your more likely an optimistic person and same goes to half empty. When I saw the glass, I thought of half empty wich is really true I am more likely a pessimist person. =( -=) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.34.118.180 (talk • contribs)

Wow

I can't beleive that they actually have an article on this.... nweinthal

Neither

The best way to say is that the glass is just half. That's it. Saying it is half full or half empty may be considered taking sides. When I say the glass is half, I'm being realistic. Anyway, the possibility of recognizing the glass as just "half" should be discussed in the article, since it's applicable to real life as well.

The glass is 50% empty and 50% full

Just solved it. Case closed.

Melchoir 04:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Significance

I'll just add that, to an engineer, the glass is twice the size it needs to be. Bunthorne 05:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

An Answer to the Question

I never understood the rhetorical value of the half empty/half full question, since the answer depends on the initial volume of the glass prior to being half empty/full. If the water was raised to the halfway mark, it is half full; if it was lowered, it is half empty. Of course, due to evaporation the water level is always lowering, so I suppose technically it would be half empty no matter what.

Damn, now I'm depressed.
Wikilackey 02:57, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter, you can always refill ~:D- -- DJiTH 02:04, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Depends - The way I see it, if you put some stuff in the glass it is half full, but if you are pouring out the liquid it is half empty.

A glass is supposed to be filled. So, if you've got some water to fill.. go ahead! --84.249.253.201 15:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Optimist vs. Pessimist

If you're an optimist, you probably see the glass half full. It is filled with a number of possibilities and opportunities. Pessimists don't think of things positively, so they see the glass as half empty. They think there is only half left until it's all gone. I personally say that an optimist is nice.

The solution

Pour into a smaller glass. The glass will be full. —  $PЯINGrαgђ  04:37, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Cosby's Law

My favorite answer comes from a Bill Cosby graduation commencement address. He tells the story of being the first in his family to go to college. He comes home from college and is eager to tell his blue collar family all about the fancy lessons he is learning. His mom ask's what he learned in school and he tells her that in Philosophy class they spent the whole day discussing whether the glass is half empty or half full. His mom, he worked in hospitality for years says, "Son, you spent all day on that, that's easy... it depends on if you're drinkin' or if you're pourin'"

I always thought that was a great answer to this debate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.145.232.91 (talk • contribs)