Apologies and defenses are orthogonal.
I should know; I defend a whole lot of ground, and I apologize a whole lot.
It is virtually impossible to do both at once. An apology is about acknowledging harm caused by actions, and seeking to fix it. To apologize is to recognize your error, at least so far as you unintentionally caused harm and don't want to again. It is about you understanding other people's perspective.
A defense is about a position. Staking out a claim and saying "This is important". Its about the issue, not about the people. It is saying that you require the people involved to participate in the intellectual discourse, to understand your position. It is about other people understanding your perspective.
To try to do both at once is to do neither well.
Am I wrong in any particular? Does this cause offense?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Listening.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you're wrong, but there are definitely areas where you haven't unearthed all the axioms that underpin your reasoning. Given that, I expect somebody vested in the contrary notion (that apologizing in order to defend totally does both well!) will come along to argue that you haven't made your case.
ReplyDeleteI think in many ways the two forces undermine each other equally. This does mean that if the apology is minor due to a minor miss step it's certainly possible to still do so and make an effective defence.
ReplyDeleteBut when the grieved party is large and/or the grievance is deep any defence is probably going to seriously undermine ones sincerity.
You can defend thing A, and apologize for thing B at the the same time, but you can't defend and apologize for thing A. It is either right, and you should defend it, or wrong, and you should apologize.
ReplyDeleteIMO.
Tony Lower-Basch Sure, it might be possible. And I kinda hope someone does come along and argue the point. If Socrates couldn't do a rhetorical challenge, then its probably too high a bar.
ReplyDeleteMark Richardson That doesn't sound false. I'm not positive I sign on it, but I also wouldn't fight against the claim.
ReplyDeleteMatt Johnson I think it is sometimes wise to apologize while bring right. If the people are more important than the issue, and you handled it poorly? Then drop the issue and make amends. But, I could well be wrong.
ReplyDeleteI get where you are coming from, and honestly my gut reaction is to agree. But if I think about it, I'm having a hard time justifying what amounts to "I'm sorry, but I'm not going to change because I'm right.". Perhaps there is merit in apologizing for the hurt even if you go forward.
ReplyDeletePhrased that way, it is totally hard to agree with. I'm with you!
ReplyDeleteHow about, "Setting aside the issue, I am more concerned that I mishandled things such that I hurt you. I'm going to do some reflection on how that happened, to better avoid it in the future. I'll also rethink my position, to see if I can better understand your perspective. I'm sorry I hurt you, and please let me know what else I need to do to make amends."
That's kinda what I mean -- that the issue becomes incidental, because the harm caused outweighs it. Does that sit any better, or does it sound weaselly?
.
ReplyDelete