I wouldn't do that if I were you....

A phrase I'm sure we've all heard many times. But do we ever stop to consider what it actually implies? Let's examine this.

In order to do that, let us create a hypothetical situation involving Kelly and Linda. Let's pretend that Linda was doing something and Kelly commented that it was really cute. Kelly might have said something along the lines of wanting to pinch Linda's cheeks because she was so cute. Linda would not be very happy about this, and would say to Kelly, "I wouldn't do that if I were you".

Now, let's stop to think about this. If Linda were Kelly, that would be it. Linda would be Kelly. Meaning Linda is Kelly, so really Linda wouldn't exist anymore. If Linda didn't exist and it was just Kelly left, as the phrase implies, then Linda would have Kelly's thoughts, Kelly's reasoning, and Kelly's silly little impulses, such as wanting to pinch her friend's cheeks. Linda would no longer have any control, making the above statement false.

So, in reality, Kelly wouldn't change at all. It would simply be Linda changing to become Kelly. Therefore, as you can see from my extensive study on the subject, that phrase makes no sense.

One phrase that would make sense, however, would be: "If I were in your position I wouldn't do that", or something along those lines. "If I were in your shoes" is just silly, because how could being in another person's shoes possibly affect the outcome? Other than it being incredibly uncomfortable and rather unsanitary, swapping shoes would have no effect. Kelly would still be Kelly, just in Linda's shoes. Linda would still be Linda, only in much smaller, tighter shoes. Kelly would still have the impulse to pinch Linda's cheeks.

So, going back to the original scenario, Linda should not have said that, because in the end it changes nothing and Kelly would go on pinching cheeks.



Hypothetically speaking, of course.