François-René ÐVB Rideau wrote on Wed, 16 May 2001 14:50:44 +0200
> Reminds me of good old Ben Franklin, who wrote in his
> autobiography:
"I made it a rule to forbear all direct contradictions to the
sentiments of others, and all positive assertion of my own.
I even forbade myself the use of every word or expression in
the language that imported a fixed opinion, such as "certainly",
"undoubtedly", etc. I adopted instead of them "I conceive",
"I apprehend", or "I imagine" a thing to be so or so; or "so it
appears to me at present".
"When another asserted something that I thought an error, I denied
myself the pleasure of contradicting him abruptly, and of showing
him immediately some absurdity in his proposition. In answering
I began by observing that in certain cases or circumstances his
opinion would be right, but in the present case there appeared
or seemed to me some difference, etc.
"I soon found the advantage of this change in my manner; the
conversations I engaged in went on more pleasantly. The modest
way in which I proposed my opinions procured them a readier
reception and less contradiction. I had less mortification when
I was found to be in the wrong, and I more easily prevailed with
others to give up their mistakes and join with me when I
happened to be in the right." <
Well, I don't deny those advantages, and it's obvious that these
strategies often smooth troubled waters to everyone's benefit.
But there is also something too evasive about the lack of candor
this entails.
It has to be possible to aim simultaneously for frankness without
bluntness, diplomacy without deceit, and plain speaking without
offense. Probably if one merely successfully avoids insult,
egomania, condescension, ridicule, and sarcasm, then one may
speak with complete frankness. And when this does offend---as
sometimes it will---well, then that's just too bad.
Lee Corbin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 10:00:06 MDT