Usefulness (and a reductionist rational approach to utility)

(current thoughts on a reductionist rational approach to utility)
​
what is my use?
can this be defined?

if so is this exclusive?

if this definition of a person or a thing’s use is not comprehensive then how is this definition useful?

any statement of the usefulness of a person or a thing is a selective paraphrasing of an epic written since the very beginning

definitions and importance given to the usefulness of a person or a thing illuminate the agenda of the source

a tree cleans the air
​provides shade on a sunny day and shelter from the rain
a tree can have a swing attached to a branch for children to play

is that all?

the uses are endless and listing them meaningless
unless useful to
categorise
reduce
define
systematise

a plumber is useful if the toilet is blocked
a person is a plumber
this person is never only a plumber
plumber is not a definition of a person
but merely a minute fragment of the contribution of a person

we are not what we do
we are not what we contribute
we are not how others define us

neither is a tree
neither is a bee
neither is a cat

and the list of exceptions is as  infinite as the nature of those on the list

lots of useful stuff