An integral part of education is to get called out when one says something particularly silly. Parents and siblings need to do it at home, and friends and peers need to play a similar role at school, university, or other institution. Often, this contribution is unforthcoming, and many people manage to enter middle and even old age without receiving this vital element of education, which is a shame.
That one is perfectly susceptible to cognitive errors and extreme stupidities is a painful realization, but it is an essential step in an individual’s progress. But there is a cut-off date for it (which comes rather early in life), after which it becomes unrealistically difficult, if not outright impossible, to have this realization. Nobody does any good to somebody voicing silly opinions by feeding the latter’s delusions, whether it is by omission or commission. This misfortune is a major ingredient in the constitution of men-children (and their female counterparts) that never cease to make life difficult for themselves as well as for those unfortunates they happen to come in contact with.
Tolerance is no doubt a virtue, but the brand of tolerance that has been in vogue for a while now is clearly a case of going grossly overboard. The proponents of this type of tolerance insist on the following: All opinions are good; so, they must all be encouraged and celebrated. There must be no disrespecting any view, because that could easily make the individual that has voiced it to withdraw into a corner so to speak and never to venture into opinion again.
Nowhere is the general lack of honesty in our society more pronounced (and with more unfortunate consequences) than in the widespread tendency of sparing others’ feelings. Of course, there are good and bad ways to put one’s thoughts across, and one must be as civil and polite as the circumstances warrant, but no more. The confidence that is so fragile as to be shattered by criticism is actually a delusion of adequacy in disguise. The question that the more sensitive souls in our midst must ask themselves is this: if feelings are hurt by the mere mention of the truth, are they worth sparing anyway?
There is much to be said against this line of reasoning. A counter argument to it, for example, would be this: Encouraging all opinions will likely delude a person into a false sense of adequacy. Thus encouraged, the degree of silliness emanating from this type of individual is apt only to increase with time. Such an individual is almost certain to keep on underestimating the importance of critical thinking, ending up losing the ability to distinguish between fact and opinion altogether.
Consider such a deluded specimen. Summarizing any incident or discussion with what she supposes are pithy oneliners has long become her second nature, and she feels very clever uttering them. She has heard these clichés somewhere but does not remember where, and therefore attributes them to her own unmatched brilliance. The problem with such comments (apart from the fact that they are all hackneyed) is that while each nugget of her wisdom may make a certain kind of sense on the separate occasion when it is uttered; put together, her ‘philosophy’ is a study in confusion and self-contradiction. A pity, because frank communication, in her formative years, from family members could so easily have cured her, or at the very least, stopped her condition from worsening. Since that did not happen, her prognosis is bleak in the extreme.
I was once acquainted with a high-school student mentor who was concerned about a pupil showing signs of some pretty eccentric behaviour– nothing criminal or even dangerous, just silly stuff. When the regularity of such incidents increased, the mentor decided to contact the parents. The mother, when she was made aware of the complaints raised by students and teachers, remarked that her son had always been unfairly targeted. And then she went on to elaborate why. It was because (she explained) folks resented the fact that her son was the promised Mehdi.
While such extreme cases doubtless exist; thankfully they happen to be rare. As a rule, the folks at home as well as the friends know better. But they still fail their duty of speaking their minds, usually in order to spare the feelings of their loved ones. It is counterproductive, because this is precisely the sort of ‘kindness’ that results in lifelong misery for the individual. They do a disservice not only to him, but to all those who, from time to time, will be obliged to suffer him.
The fact of the matter is that human beings are not as fragile as some believe. A young man may feel dispirited or even heart-broken when he is shown a glimpse of harsh truth. Such are the realities of life, however, that sooner rather than later he bounces back, as he must. And if he is the right sort, he does it, having learnt a valuable lesson. The next time when he is told that he makes little sense on some other issue, he is not likely to be nearly as shocked. This is the way one develops a hard skin, which comes in handy on the occasions when one is wrong (and somebody points the fact out); and which is crucial for the times when one is right (and is being unfairly criticised). Nothing keeps a person honest (and circumspect) while voicing opinions more than the realization that those around him are going to evaluate it and are going to be ruthless in their appraisal.
There is something even more essential than wholesome nourishment that a mother must provide her young ones with. And that is regular and healthy doses of home truths served at the dining table. In fact, all the family members should be counted upon to do the same for one another. There is nothing like frank, uncensored appraisal from those who are fond of us that keep our feet firmly on the ground.
Nowhere is the general lack of honesty in our society more pronounced (and with more unfortunate consequences) than in the widespread tendency of sparing others’ feelings. Of course, there are good and bad ways to put one’s thoughts across, and one must be as civil and polite as the circumstances warrant, but no more. The confidence that is so fragile as to be shattered by criticism is actually a delusion of adequacy in disguise. The question that the more sensitive souls in our midst must ask themselves is this: if feelings are hurt by the mere mention of the truth, are they worth sparing anyway?
