Learn Do Not It Wrong Again Anything That Can Go Wrong Will Go Wrong
Source: WeAre/Shutterstock
We all make mistakes, and we do so with regularity. Some errors are small, such equally, "No, nosotros don't need to stop at the store; in that location'south enough of milk left for breakfast." Some are bigger, such as, "Don't rush me; we have plenty of fourth dimension to get to the airport before the flight leaves." And some are crucial, such as, "I know it was raining and dark, but I'm sure that was the man I saw breaking into the home beyond the street."
No 1 enjoys existence wrong. It's an unpleasant emotional feel for all of us. The question is how practise we respond when information technology turns out we were wrong—when there wasn't enough milk left for java, when we striking traffic and missed the flying, or when we find out the man who sat in jail for five years based on our identification was innocent all along?
Some of usa admit we were wrong and say, "Oops, you were correct. We should have gotten more milk."
Some of united states of america kind of imply nosotros were incorrect, but we don't practice so explicitly or in a fashion that is satisfying to the other person: "We had plenty of time to go to the airport on fourth dimension if the traffic hadn't been unusually bad. Just fine, we'll leave earlier next fourth dimension."
But some people refuse to admit they're wrong, even in the face up of overwhelming evidence: "They let him go considering of DNA evidence and some other dude'south confession? Ridiculous! That'due south the guy! I saw him!"
The first ii examples are probably familiar to virtually of us because those are typical responses to being wrong. We take responsibility fully or partially (sometimes, very, very partially), but we don't push button back against the actual facts. We don't merits there was enough milk when at that place wasn't, or that we were not belatedly to the drome.
But what about when a person does push back against the facts, when they only cannot admit they were wrong in any circumstance? What is information technology in their psychological makeup that makes it impossible for them to admit they were wrong, fifty-fifty when information technology is obvious they were? And why does this happen so repetitively—why do they never admit they were wrong?
The reply is related to their ego; their very sense of self.
A Frail Ego Leads to Attempts to Distort Reality
Some people have such a fragile ego, such brittle self-esteem, such a weak "psychological constitution," that admitting they made a mistake or that they were wrong is fundamentally likewise threatening for their egos to tolerate. Accepting they were wrong, absorbing that reality, would be so psychologically shattering, their defense mechanisms practice something remarkable to avoid doing so—they literally distort their perception of reality to make it (reality) less threatening. Their defense mechanisms protect their fragile ego by irresolute the very facts in their mind, so they are no longer wrong or culpable.
As a result, they come up upward with statements, such as, "I checked in the morning, and there was plenty milk, so someone must accept finished information technology." When information technology'southward pointed out that no one was home after they left in the morning time, then no one could have done that, they double downwardly and repeat, "Someone must have, because I checked, and in that location was milk," every bit though some phantom broke into the house, finished the milk and left without a trace.
In our other case, they volition insist that their erroneous identification of the robber was correct despite Dna evidence and a confession from a different person. When confronted, they will continue to insist or pivot to attacking anyone who tries to argue otherwise and to disparaging the sources of the contradictory data (e.g., "These labs make mistakes all the fourth dimension, and besides, yous can't trust a confession from some other criminal! And why do you ever take their side?").
People who repeatedly exhibit this kind of behavior are, by definition, psychologically delicate. All the same, that assessment is often difficult for people to accept, because to the outside globe, they wait as if they're confidently standing their ground and not backing down, things we associate with strength. Simply psychological rigidity is non a sign of strength, it is an indication of weakness. These people are not choosing to stand their ground; they're compelled to practice so in social club to protect their fragile egos. Albeit we are incorrect is unpleasant, it is bruising for any ego. It takes a certain amount of emotional strength and courage to bargain with that reality and own up to our mistakes. Most of usa sulk a bit when we have to admit we're wrong, just we get over it.
But when people are constitutionally unable to acknowledge they're wrong, when they cannot tolerate the very notion that they are capable of mistakes, it is because they suffer from an ego and so fragile that they cannot sulk and become over it—they need to warp their very perception of reality and challenge obvious facts in order to defend their non existence wrong in the first place.
How we respond to such people is up to united states. The i mistake we should not make is to consider their persistent and rigid refusal to admit they're incorrect every bit a sign of strength or confidence because it is the accented opposite—psychological weakness and fragility.
Copyright 2018 Guy Winch
Facebook/LinkedIn image: WeAre/Shutterstock
Source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-squeaky-wheel/201811/why-certain-people-will-never-admit-they-were-wrong
0 Response to "Learn Do Not It Wrong Again Anything That Can Go Wrong Will Go Wrong"
Postar um comentário