I love the concept behind Socratic discussion that the discussion itself can help the person discern what went wrong rather than having to explicitly say it. There is kindness in helping others understand without humiliating them. So good!
I have found that there are many people who wish to correct people just for the joy of correcting someone. It really doesn’t matter if the sky is mostly sunny or partly cloudy, but that observation will be corrected by someone who wants to be right about all things at all times.
Great point! Let’s not forget the colossal ego of the one doing the correcting. What gain is in humiliating someone needing correcting? And, what an asshole concept of the corrector- that somehow they are in a superior position to “correct” anyone - most times it is they themselves that need the correction - of attitude, self importance and self perceived status.
Yes, John! I know them too. Until reading this essay I hadn't put it together with a hidden quest for power, but I think now that may be the foundation of 'the need to be right!'
I didn’t see your reply until this morning and then I was working on digitizing my hand written book manuscript and came across what is pasted below.
July 20
Release the rubbish
Simplicity is the way
Peace stays in the heart
Mental clutter grows when every disagreement feels deserving of attention, or correction. Some thoughts, arguments, and opinions are better released than carried into unnecessary conflict.
Simplicity returns when energy is no longer spent trying to open what remains firmly closed. Letting the rubbish pass leaves more room for quiet, preserving inner peace that never required winning the argument.
Nice piece. While truth and logic should theoretically stand on their own, effective correction requires more than accuracy. Humiliation only breeds defensiveness, replacing reason with self-preservation. Yet today, even sound logic often fails without trust, empathy, and emotional resonance. Real persuasion demands that we preserve the other person’s dignity while building a bridge of shared identity and authority.
I read this article with great interest, and offer a comment from a tradition that arrives at the same place by another road.
The rabbis called public shaming halbanat panim, the whitening of the face, and ranked it with bloodshed — the colour draining from a man's face being his blood spilled in public. And the biblical verse that commands rebuke, "you shall surely rebuke your neighbour", is read as carrying its own limit in the words that follow: "and do not bear sin because of him." Correct him, but not at the cost of who and what he is.
It is easy to rebuke impetuously, because it makes us feel good. But rebuking in a way that brings about change while leaving the person's dignity intact requires careful thought and measured words.
What strikes me most is your last point — that the humiliation belongs to our character rather than to their deserving. Forty years of people bringing me their mistakes taught me the same thing from the other end. What they are really watching is what it will cost them to tell you.
Thank you! Your essay is important and timely. Your statement, 'Being right places us in a small position of power' is quite true- in ways I hadn't really taken in before. I think of the times I, or another have 'needed to be right'. I wonder, in those instances, about the role played by the need to feel powerful, and how that position was used.
This post hit many true notes for me. How we deal with another person's faults and mistakes is paramount in our relationship with them and what comes after. Thanks for this persepctive. The medicine used by a physician was the perfect analogy.
A great read on a topic most don’t want to hear. Thai reminds me a lot of “Schofield’s definition of discipline” which was a poster we had in my Army basic training bay and has stuck with me through the years.
“The discipline which makes the soldiers of a free country reliable in battle is not to be gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary, such treatment is far more likely to destroy than to make an army. It is possible to impart instructions and to give commands in such a manner and in such a tone of voice as to inspire in the soldier no feeling but and intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey. The one mode or other of dealing with subordinates springs from a corresponding spirit in the breast of the commander. He who feels the respect which is due others cannot fail to inspire in them regard for himself; while he who feels, and hence manifests, disrespect toward other, especially his inferiors, cannot fail to inspire hatred against himself.”
Excellent. Thanks for making it free! I read and learned a
good bit the Stoics in two college philosophy classes and both professors emphasized Socratic dialogue. However, unless memory fails me, they didn’t apply it to correcting people, just to teaching.
I have known people who applied the method to corrections intuitively.
My late mom was one. She loved debating and was sensitive to others’ need to leave a lost argument with dignity intact.
Me? Generally, I was too much in a hurry.
Luckily, I rarely need to try to correct people in retirement. I tend to just let things slide, in order to maintain a peaceful mental balance.
A person’s true character is often revealed by how they treat others when they have the opportunity to prove them wrong. It is easy to win an argument, but much harder to leave another person with their dignity intact. Many conflicts are not about truth itself, but about the human desire to feel superior. Real strength comes from having enough inner stability that you do not need to diminish someone else to protect your own position. Wisdom is not only the ability to know what is right, but also the ability to communicate it with respect and understanding
Excellent piece! These points are especially important in raising children. When correction goes awry, kids don’t learn to behave better. They learn to hide their mistakes and lie to their parents.
I love the concept behind Socratic discussion that the discussion itself can help the person discern what went wrong rather than having to explicitly say it. There is kindness in helping others understand without humiliating them. So good!
I’ve realized there’s a huge difference between correcting someone and making them feel small.
Anyone can win an argument. The harder skill is telling someone they’re wrong without making them regret being honest with you.
Sometimes the most powerful thing you can say after making your point is nothing at all.
Truth should fix the situation, not destroy the person.
I have found that there are many people who wish to correct people just for the joy of correcting someone. It really doesn’t matter if the sky is mostly sunny or partly cloudy, but that observation will be corrected by someone who wants to be right about all things at all times.
Great point! Let’s not forget the colossal ego of the one doing the correcting. What gain is in humiliating someone needing correcting? And, what an asshole concept of the corrector- that somehow they are in a superior position to “correct” anyone - most times it is they themselves that need the correction - of attitude, self importance and self perceived status.
Yes, John! I know them too. Until reading this essay I hadn't put it together with a hidden quest for power, but I think now that may be the foundation of 'the need to be right!'
I didn’t see your reply until this morning and then I was working on digitizing my hand written book manuscript and came across what is pasted below.
July 20
Release the rubbish
Simplicity is the way
Peace stays in the heart
Mental clutter grows when every disagreement feels deserving of attention, or correction. Some thoughts, arguments, and opinions are better released than carried into unnecessary conflict.
Simplicity returns when energy is no longer spent trying to open what remains firmly closed. Letting the rubbish pass leaves more room for quiet, preserving inner peace that never required winning the argument.
Great 👍 indeed
Nice piece. While truth and logic should theoretically stand on their own, effective correction requires more than accuracy. Humiliation only breeds defensiveness, replacing reason with self-preservation. Yet today, even sound logic often fails without trust, empathy, and emotional resonance. Real persuasion demands that we preserve the other person’s dignity while building a bridge of shared identity and authority.
Thank you this, I really really needed this
I read this article with great interest, and offer a comment from a tradition that arrives at the same place by another road.
The rabbis called public shaming halbanat panim, the whitening of the face, and ranked it with bloodshed — the colour draining from a man's face being his blood spilled in public. And the biblical verse that commands rebuke, "you shall surely rebuke your neighbour", is read as carrying its own limit in the words that follow: "and do not bear sin because of him." Correct him, but not at the cost of who and what he is.
It is easy to rebuke impetuously, because it makes us feel good. But rebuking in a way that brings about change while leaving the person's dignity intact requires careful thought and measured words.
What strikes me most is your last point — that the humiliation belongs to our character rather than to their deserving. Forty years of people bringing me their mistakes taught me the same thing from the other end. What they are really watching is what it will cost them to tell you.
Thank you! Your essay is important and timely. Your statement, 'Being right places us in a small position of power' is quite true- in ways I hadn't really taken in before. I think of the times I, or another have 'needed to be right'. I wonder, in those instances, about the role played by the need to feel powerful, and how that position was used.
This post hit many true notes for me. How we deal with another person's faults and mistakes is paramount in our relationship with them and what comes after. Thanks for this persepctive. The medicine used by a physician was the perfect analogy.
A great read on a topic most don’t want to hear. Thai reminds me a lot of “Schofield’s definition of discipline” which was a poster we had in my Army basic training bay and has stuck with me through the years.
“The discipline which makes the soldiers of a free country reliable in battle is not to be gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary, such treatment is far more likely to destroy than to make an army. It is possible to impart instructions and to give commands in such a manner and in such a tone of voice as to inspire in the soldier no feeling but and intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey. The one mode or other of dealing with subordinates springs from a corresponding spirit in the breast of the commander. He who feels the respect which is due others cannot fail to inspire in them regard for himself; while he who feels, and hence manifests, disrespect toward other, especially his inferiors, cannot fail to inspire hatred against himself.”
The distinction between correcting behaviour and judging identity matters.
“What you did was wrong” leaves room for responsibility, repair and change. “You are a bad person” leaves someone defending themselves instead.
Excellent. Thanks for making it free! I read and learned a
good bit the Stoics in two college philosophy classes and both professors emphasized Socratic dialogue. However, unless memory fails me, they didn’t apply it to correcting people, just to teaching.
I have known people who applied the method to corrections intuitively.
My late mom was one. She loved debating and was sensitive to others’ need to leave a lost argument with dignity intact.
Me? Generally, I was too much in a hurry.
Luckily, I rarely need to try to correct people in retirement. I tend to just let things slide, in order to maintain a peaceful mental balance.
I really enjoyed this, thank you.
A person’s true character is often revealed by how they treat others when they have the opportunity to prove them wrong. It is easy to win an argument, but much harder to leave another person with their dignity intact. Many conflicts are not about truth itself, but about the human desire to feel superior. Real strength comes from having enough inner stability that you do not need to diminish someone else to protect your own position. Wisdom is not only the ability to know what is right, but also the ability to communicate it with respect and understanding
Excellent piece! These points are especially important in raising children. When correction goes awry, kids don’t learn to behave better. They learn to hide their mistakes and lie to their parents.
People remember how you make them "Feel."