Everybody's Right (but Everybody's Wrong)

So . . . one of my favorite articles I have ever read was from an edition of Esquire from a few years back (still floating around on the ether here).  What I like about the article is that it expresses the notion that two opinions can be on opposite sides of an issue and both be right.  It rejects the idea that being in opposition means being wrong (or right, depending on where you're sitting).  This is a tremendously important idea, even if Chuck Klosterman, who wrote the piece, uses a rather flippant tone throughout.  So it's not "you're either with us or against us," but rather "we have the same goals but different ways of getting there."

I find that I use the phrase "just because I disagree with you doesn't mean that I'm wrong" a whole lot.  Too many people have it in their heads that there is a right and there is a wrong, and not only are these easily identifiable, but also that they have some sort of monoploy on the former.  It is this type of person that regards every discussion or argument as a battle to win their adversary's agreement.

Now I am not exactly known for being acquiescent or agreeable.  An aspect of my job that I find very rewarding is the give and take of classroom discussions, and the delving into a topic that is not as cut and dried as, say, accounting.  I have even been called a contrarian from time to time (but no more often than about four times a day). But it is a rare case when I am trying to convince someone to change their mind.  I enjoy a good argument (though this would be more frustrating than anything).  In my usual selfish style, I am more interested in expressing my point of view and responding to the other person's.

One area where this comes to the fore is in one of my courses.  This course uses business cases to help students gain experience in making realistic management decisions.  The business cases are intended to provide a right or wrong basis for making decisions, but rather to help develop a framework for making any such decisions.  But the students invariably want to know what the "right" answer is.   Even though there is no such thing, and any number of answers could be right if explained and executed properly, we are conditioned to think that some answers are right and others wrong (and typically, for me, there is assymetry here: even though there is no right answer, there can be a great number of wrong answers). 

Life would be much easier if we could easily classify things as good or bad, right or wrong, sensible or not.  But we can't.  I have strong opinions on how best to educate young people for a career in business.  Another professor may think my approach is not as good as theirs.  Does that make them wrong?  Of course not.  There are too many variables involved to come to a definite conclusion that one way is the only way.

And if you need more proof, look only to politics, where being in possession of "the only way" is a sure bet to get elected, and a sure bet to screw things up.