Please explain this Dilbert to me

It’s from 2/13/2000. I didn’t get it then, and I still don’t get it now.
Here it is

Thank you.

There’s no way that the pointy-haired boss could avoid screwing up his kids, yet he had some anyways, because he’s an illogical moron. Likewise, they’re going to come out with a product that’s doomed to failure because the business is run by illogical morons.

The joke is that the “reason” the boss gives is no reason at all.

  1. : inviting Marketing to the meeting is ultimately fruitless
    2: but we’re still going to do it
  2. Why? For the same reason I had kids, ie, not because I wanted them but because it’s what you do. “we invite marketing because its less work than dealing with the blowback if we don’t”

Not quite. They’re not going to invite Marketing to this meeting, but they’re going to find some other way to ruin the project as it comes down the pipe.

The relevant activity is not inviting them, but launching a project that is doomed to failure either way.

Other than that, I agree with your analysis.

I think chrisk has it right – it just isn’t very funny.

I read it on a couple of levels, it’s not particularly funny but it’s amusing.

  1. It’s the management dilemma of “damned if you do, damned if you don’t”
  2. As Hello Again stated “because it’s what you do”
  3. The world/society/civilization is doomed, but yet we still have kids knowing what their ultimate fate is.
  4. Bringing your kids into a discussion about work can end a meeting quickly.

Dilbert’s answer could be read a couple of ways:

  1. Sarcastic a la “Boss doesn’t know the reason for either”
  2. Sarcastic a la “If you didn’t want to tell me… fine, but I don’t want to hear about your kids”
  3. He 's content that at least there is a reason, and its knowledge is above his pay scale.
  4. He doesn’t grasp the conceptual metaphor about having kids and doesn’t want to.

Because life has to go on, and they have to do something to keep the corporation and their jobs afloat.

It’s not that we think the next generation or the next project will magically be the one that goes perfectly and works wonders; it’s that the alternative is obliteration.

It works better as an insult

  • I’m launching a project that is doomed to failure
  • So why start the project at all?
  • I dunno, why did you bother having kids?

It’s funny because it’s an exasperating situation. It’s just like life, don’t you think?

I’m trying to decide if I should be impressed or frightened that the folks on SDMB have managed to do a literary critique of Dilbert.

I shall retire to my bunker and contemplate. :wink: :smiley:

You’re new here, right? :slight_smile:

It’s a riff on ‘the triumph of hope over experience’.

I think this was during of Adams’s “positive visualization” period*, so he probably told himself how funny this strip was.

See how well positive visualization works?

  • Which for all I know he may still be in.

Thanks everybody.

OK, so it seems like there’s really not much to get, or else it’s open to interpretation.

I like TruCelt’s answer though. You just do it to get it out of the way and move on.

How about this one:

“It’s the same reason I had kids” = “I like to fuck people.”

This was what I thought of too. I don’t know what Scott Adams had in mind.

I could see Adams slipping in a dirty joke like that.

I thought it was because the boss is bored.

My experience as a software developer is that the more exposure your project gets to non-engineering teams, the more “changes”, “enhancements”, and “clarifications” get tacked on. Of course, management isn’t always terribly keen on giving you extra time to handle these matters.

THAT was the funniest part of this thread!
As always, it’s great having the Cherry on top!:smiley:

–G!