alt Hacker NewsThis attitude reminds me of another phrase that I've internalized.
Choosing to be right, is choosing to be alone.
Whatever you choose to put above trying to get along with others, limits who can be part of your group. In the extreme, you will feel absolutely justified. And yet be absolutely alone.
As an example, language communities that focus on being able to find the ideal way to program (eg Lisp) tend to splinter. The languages that achieve broad acceptance (eg Python) do things that most people recognize as bad.
This doesn't mean that we should always choose to get along, rather than being right. But failing to address emotions up front has damaged so many parts of my life, that I firmly wish that I hadn't stood for so long on how right my behavior was.
I hope that your choices are working better for you than my past choices did for me.
Replies
I understand the need to engage people at the emotional level and meeting them where they're at. I just refuse to label this behavior as being constructive, desirable, something to cultivate and protect.
I see this "complainy" way of engaging as unproductive and i treat it the same way I would treat my kid when having a tantrum, I accept it, I listen to him, I am understanding of his state and his emotions, but I also nudge, coach and hope they develop healthier and more constructive ways of dealing with their problems.
I often hear a different version of that quote: You can be right, or you can be happy.
Who is the one choosing, though? I think it's the one who brings another person into the conversation with a problem begging for help that turns on that same person for trying to make the situation better. That is the person who needs to be empathetic when they are the one seeking help. But apparently we live in this bizarre world where emotions are always right.
> Choosing to be right, is choosing to be alone.
And as another commenter put it:
> You can be right, or you can be happy.
Are both invoking a false dichotomy. I phrase it differently:
"Put the focus on being useful, not on being right."
One often can be both right and useful. More importantly, being useful often means ignoring (minor) wrong things.
I had a coworker who focused on being right to the extreme. When someone would get stuck on a technical problem, he was masterful in being correct without helping the other person. He wouldn't look at the bigger picture, and wouldn't spend time trying to understand the other person's goals beyond the immediate problem he was facing.
Often, the person seeking help was phrasing things poorly (because of a poor understanding), and instead of diagnosing the problem, he'd just focus on what was said and provide a very correct and useless answer.
I was like that (perhaps I still am), just not to as extreme degree. The difference was that I wasn't as annoying in being correct, and people were comfortable in telling me "Yes, but none of what you said is helping me!" at which point I was forced to understand the bigger picture.
So: Before jumping to be right, focus on the real problem, and solve that (i.e. being useful). Forget the little minor incorrectness that was presented to you. Dwelling on correcting it is helping no one.