Letting go of Right

Letting go of Right

©Scott D. Wilson 2014

We all want to be right.  It is natural.  Our primary reason for wanting to be right is because we logically assume that if we are not right then we must be wrong.  We believe that there exists a single unchallengeable objective truth; all other views are therefore wrong and false.  Sadly, this is an error and it is one that causes a lot of grief.  The closest way that I can illustrate this fallacy is with colour.


It is illogical to assume that if something is not white then it must be black.  Just as right and wrong are logical extremes so too are black and white.  White the is actually a mix of all visible light colours while black is the absence of all these same colours.   So it is with right and wrong.  Rarely are we as humans discussing things that are truly cut and dry.  We may think that things are either black or white but that is rarely so.  Just as white light is made up of the various primary colours so too can right have different aspects as well.


By this analogy one could not argue that red is more white than say yellow.  Both colours are equally elements of white light.  The same thing frequently holds true when we argue over what is right and wrong.  More often than not we are usually debating the difference between one element of right and another one.  We are, in effect, discussing red and yellow and arguing that one is more white than the other.  We do this at our own loss; for in so doing we frequently lose the opportunity to learn something about ourselves and our opponent.


Because of the many facets of truth it is impossible for any one person to obtain a monopoly on truth.  As illustrated with the analogy of colour, truth has many facets.  What can make right and wrong, truth and error even more tricky is the fact that many truths exist within paradox.  I am an electrical engineer so I will choose a physical paradox to illustrate this one: light.


Depending on how you choose to observe it light acts either as a particle or a wave.  That fact is paradoxical because particle and wave models cannot be reconciled to each other. The truth is that we truly do not know what this means in regards to light.  The best physics can come up with is that light exists in an undetermined wave/particle state until we try to observe it.  So saying that light is a particle is equally true and false, right and wrong.  It is likewise in regards to light as wave.  Once again, our premise that there must be one correct view and all others views are wrong is proven in error here.


As I stated before, our need to be correct is strong and natural.  No one wants to be in error.  The light paradox should alert us to the fact that often truths are personal based on the observer.  What is right for me may not necessarily be right for you.  Each of us has an obligation to test the validity of things and ideas for ourselves.  We cannot have others do this for us by proxy.  Our experience and view is unique to us and to us alone.


For example, I have a relationship and view of my eldest sister that will in some ways be in complete contradiction to that of her husband, her children or my mother.  My truths about her will only work in the context of our unique relationship as brother and sister.  Those views will no longer be entirely right from someone else’s standpoint.  My sister and I will be confident in those truths between us; we do not need to be right in the eyes of other people.  It therefore becomes important to understand that what is true for us may not be true for others.  Likewise, what may be true in some context is not true in all circumstances.


Confidence in our own truths is another thing which aids us in letting go of right.  If you are truly confident that you are right then you should not feel an obligation to prove it to everyone else.  The need to convince others of our correctness often springs from a lack of conviction on our part.  If what you believe is true then you should be confident that eventually that truth will be revealed to others without the need for your to convince them.  This shows confidence in the nature of our truth.  We need to allow others to find the truth for themselves because in the end it is not right to seek to control them nor to rob them of responsibility for their own lives.


Fear of being wrong is unhealthy and can actually blind us to the truth.  We often invest much time and effort based on what we deem to be right.  This investment can make us biased.  The scholars who worked hard making mathematical models of the solar system with earth at the centre were  hardly open to ideas that Galileo presented.  A sun-centred model meant they had wasted much of their careers.  We all naturally react this way.  In this case, the scholars’ models were wrong and Galileo was right.  Had the scholars been brave enough to consider themselves capable of error then they might have seen the truth in Galileo’s observations.  Do not let fear of error blind you.


My last point in favour of abandoning the need to be right comes from Dale Carnegie in his book “How to Win Friends and Influence People.”  In it he writes:

“You can't win an argument. You can't because if you lose it, you lose it; and if you win it, you lose it.”

The statement may seem to contradict itself but it does not.  We cannot win an argument with someone without making them feel diminished and inferior.  The person’s ego will rebel and it is unlikely the person will be truly convinced of your truth.


There is a psychology experiment where an unfocused image is projected on a wall and the participants in the experiment are asked to guess what the image may be.  In one scenario the participants’ beliefs are challenged and in the control group no comment is given on the person’s guess.  The image is slowly brought into focus and the participants are either challenged or merely questioned on their guess.  The results of the test are remarkable.


Those who were only continually asked what they saw were eventually able to see the actual image when it was brought into focus regardless of what they initially guessed about the image.  However, those who had their guesses challenged became more and more entrenched in their view and often continued to argue their guess even after the image was brought into complete focus.  Some participants could not actually admit when their guess had been completely incorrect.  The experiment showed that the act of arguing itself had actually reinforced the initial views of the parties even when the final outcome had concretely disproven their initial beliefs.  

So even when we win at being right, we lose.  In our efforts to be right we can actually make it harder for others to see the truth that may be plainly before them.  Just like our muscles, beliefs tend to grow stronger under resistance.  This is a counter-intuitive truth.   A better approach in such conflicts is not to nay say but rather inject “Yes and…”  Agree with their truth and present your own views.  By agreeing first we prevent the resistance that will sabotage an open discourse.


In conclusion, it would seem that our need to be right in the eyes of others usually has destructive consequences for ourselves and others.  Truth needs to be seen in context and we need to appreciate that our own truth may not completely translate to the point of view of others.  We need to seek truth and understanding for ourselves and allow others the freedom to do likewise without undue influence.  We should not fear error, but remain open to correction.   Respect the views of others and instead of tearing away at their understanding offer instead your truth to stand beside theirs as an equal.


Letting go of right can go a long way towards peace in ourselves and with others.  We still must find what is right and correct for ourselves.  However, speak your truth quietly and you will find that your influence will extend much further than it ever would by winning some debate.