These are of the same essence just like a Man, Woman, and Child are Human.
Different purposes achieving a common goal even though there are different roles.
Who has heard of the impossible triangle of business?
It goes by different names, but the principle doesn't change.
The fundamental basis is three categories and how profit is tough to maintain if they all connect.
Essentially it is: Cost, Speed, Quality.
The principle could be put into an engineering principle of Thermodynamics of any system.
However, unlike physics, the business model displays a clear desire to maximize everything while putting in hardly anything and coming out with a profit.
Sounds familiar in regards to most corporate manufacturing processes, I think.
It may seem easy in theory, but the difficulty arises in the face of competition. The reason why is because sometimes someone just wants something cheaper, or faster, or higher quality. Picking one of the three attributes without caring much for the other two.
If it's hard to understand, consider how the Fast Food business is.
Sure, you have your speed and the cost is low.. The quality however, is horrific to the eye and even to other parts of the body. This is not consistent to every fast-food chain, but some sacrifice a bit of speed to give quality (which it may just be slow but it's more satisfactory). In fact, some maintain speed and quality, but sacrifice low cost. Then on the far side of the food spectrum are those who sacrifice speed and cost for the sake of highest quality (ironically, nature does this very thing for good reasons).
Before I make my point confounded for the sake of explaining a concept, I'll wrap this explanation up.
This triangle is a juggling experience. Balance can be obtained, but the glory of the juggle itself is achieved when a lack of balance doesn't lead to catastrophic consequences. Which, in the business sense, leads to forfeiture of customer loyalty, business integrity, and economic longevity.
When I brought up Real, Realistic, and Reality I was suggesting the impossible triangle.
The reason why the triangle is impossible, in this case, is because of a 3 dimensional aspect.
If you thought I was confounding my point, then realize now I'm stepping into the realm of higher cognitive processing. This should come easy to anyone who can entertain themselves with their imagination, otherwise I suggest getting something to draw with. Because this is simple geometrical conceptualization. I should be able to nail this within one paragraph.
What's real is reality, but that doesn't make it realistic; neither is it harmful or beneficial. It isn't the future, but it was present even though it is in the past. What's realistic is real, but that doesn't make it reality; neither is it necessary or harmful. It isn't the present, but it is in the future and the present. What's reality is real, but that doesn't make it realistic; neither is it beneficial or necessary. It is the present, but it will be in the past.
That must be tough to understand, I don't care how intuitive you think you are. Because this concept requires more than thinking outside of the box, it requires thinking outside the sphere that contains the box. In fact, language is a barrier for this concept because I have to structure my English properly while sacrificing concepts in order to maintain visualization.
Geez.. The triangle strikes again!
Maybe we shouldn't call it a triangle since the crux is maintaining equilateral distance?
So now the point, if I haven't lost you to the abyss of confusion.
How do we humans, equipped with the greatest quantum computer (yes, it is. Scientists are agreeing that the complexity of the brain is in the far, far higher realms of quantum processing) on his planet, delegate equilateral 'fairness' to the impossible triangle, so that it is very much possible?
I don't 'feel' it is impossible, I believe that the problem is solely of complexity.
Then again.. Complex, vague, esoteric.. Same Name, Different Game.
