When multiple hands work on a single project from different directions, the patchwork of designs may reveal the lack of coordination; yet, the beauty of the diversity in pattern, color, dimension and creativity may make up for such lack of uniformity. Thus, lack of uniformity need not mean that the end-result lacks beauty; and, indeed, lack of conformity can in and of itself be a form of delicate attraction.
But human beings possess an innate desire for a sense of logical comprehension, and while overlapping patterns may possess a beauty of diversity, anarchical presentation of exploding colors and patterns must ultimately be brought together into some semblance of coordination.
There is, of course, a distinction to be made between art and mathematics; between artistic endeavors, which may bend the rules of uniformity, as opposed to a cohesive and comprehensible presentation in the form of a persuasive argument. In law, an overlapping patchwork of arguments may unintentionally hit the mark; but you would not want to rely upon such an imprecise approach.
In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the approach of culling together a patchwork of arguments — borrowing a report from one’s OWCP doctor; arguing that because one received a percentage rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs, the relevance upon an OPM disability retirement application should be of X consequence; extrapolating language from an SSDI decision — while all of these are of some consequence, each must ultimately be garnered into a coherent whole.
It may well be that one’s Federal Disability Retirement application began as a patchwork of information; in the end, however, it should be the hand of a single artist who reworks the pattern into a cohesive whole.
Robert R. McGill, Esquire