Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

McGladrey Tax Associate Opts for Pedantry in His Farewell Email

Unless you work in a soul-sucking environment with a bunch of glory hogging superiors who are constantly kicking you down, you will get several opportunities to showcase your intelligence during your careers. 
Sometimes these opportunities arise at logical places and times like a client meeting or maybe during a training session. It's also possible for these opportunities to arise at unexpected times like at a team lunch when you have broccoli stuck in your teeth or when you are forced pull an LBJ on a colleague because, well, these things happen.
Anyway, earlier today we received an example of someone trying to demonstrate some smarts they are in a place you might not expect — a farewell email. 
According to our tipster, the following was sent by "a tax associate [to] the entire tax department," and "eventually retracted per the request of a partner":
Throughout history, man has faced a continual struggle- both collectively and individually-  between two disparate factors. Applying the nomenclature presented by Aristotle in describing argumentative approaches, this conflict derives from the habitual incongruity between logos and pathos. While logos emphasizes the use of reason, pathos accentuates emotional appeal. The majority of Western philosophical thought, from Heraclitus to  Hume, appears to favor concepts of logos and reason over pathos and emotion. Unfortunately, this perspective fails to take a sufficiently comprehensive view of the individual. Instead, individuals frequently engage in practices without sufficient reason or logic.  Conversely, the pathologically focused philosophers- from the Stoics to Nietzsche- inordinately understate the importance of logical reasoning. Thus, a coherent approach should optimize the underpinnings of both theoretical schools of thought. In full cognizance of the aforementioned necessity for a compromise theoretical view, I often prove reticent to embark upon major decisions without fully analyzing the application of both contrasting theories. It is only after the application of  this more holistic view that I have elected to dissolve the bands which have connected me to McGladrey.

While I could continue on with writing this needlessly theoretical analysis of the reasons I am leaving, I am reminded of the words of Charles Mingus: " Anyone can make the simple complicated. Creativity is making the complicated simple." (  In light of this message, I will simply summarize my message as follows:

– Effective today, I am no longer a Tax Associate at McGladrey LLP.

– I will be moving to [a redacted location] next month

– If anyone is ever in the [redacted location] (for [redacted events that would identify the location] or anything else) and needs  a  place to crash for a night or two, don't hesitate to contact me.

– I would like to thank each of you for the impact you had on me during my time here. I learned a lot and appreciate it.

If you're like me you read this thing the first time and thought, DUDE, YOU'RE SMART WE GET IT. JUST SAY GOOD-BYE. Then you read it a second time and think, "Wait, you're just applying the worn-out ethos of 'Everything in moderation' to the spectrum of philosophy and that's not profound AT ALL." Then you click on the video link because that could be intersting and then you see that it's a 2 hour video and you're like FUCK THAT. Then you read it again and think, "Well, he contrasts the verbose first half with the concise second half nicely at least."
And then you might think, "He quit McGladrey. Good for him. Still an obnoxious email."
If you had a different take on it, feel free to share it below.