Who is Right Anyway?

Recently many people have discussed with me the notion of whether it matters or not that you are right. I think it does, though I appear to be in the minority. Let me ask you this though – if you had the choice between being right or wrong (whatever that might mean) which one would you pick? I know I would pick being right. Why? Because I think it is better. The more important (and difficult) question to me is "what is right?"

Right is sometimes obvious - 1+1 is 2. In such a scenario the facts are clear and the frame of reference is generally assumed to be one in which that scenario is right. You can, with some annoying logic, redefine the frame of reference so that 1+1 is not 2, but then you are living in a universe that is different from the one that I prefer to live in. So am I saying that there is no absolute right? – yes I am. Perhaps Descartes said it most succinctly - "I think therefore I am". Nevertheless, from a practical perspective, there is a right and I think it is better than wrong.

Right is less obvious when the facts are unclear or the situation involves a variety of variables that are difficult to analyse or resolve. I find human relations in this category. People have different views and I think that there is no absolute right to these sorts of quandaries. It is helpful to set up some definitions and boundaries for being right and wrong in these contexts. The definitions and boundaries are, in my opinion, the first step in terms of determining the frame of reference from which each person is viewing the situation. For example, if 1 person plans to see a movie, it is easy for that person to come to a consensus, they just pick the movie they want to see and go. However, if that person wants to see a movie with someone else, then they need to factor in the desires of the other person, or accept the fact that the other person may not be interested in seeing the same movie. If they other person does not want to see the same movie, then a choice is presented – either see the movie of choice alone or change the movie (I am assuming that there is no persuading the other to see the movie of choice). There is no right or wrong selection per se, but there is a right or wrong choice depending on what the true desire is - do you want to see the movie or do you want to spend time with the someone else. This is a choice that you are entirely in control of and I argue that it is in these moments that you are presented with the opportunity to truly be yourself. This is why it is important to be right.

The movie scenario is trivial, but I think that many people can relate to it. The same choices are presented in terms of supporting one particular vendor over another, the types of food you eat, the type of government you support and all of the things that make up the society we live in. I choose not to eat meat that is grown on a farm. I have made this choice because I believe that it is environmentally responsible for me to behave this way, particularly in terms of water conservation. I like meat and I would eat it with joy if I didn’t believe that society is better with pescaterianism (I only buy wild fish because I believe that farmed fish is also harmful to water supplies). Having said that, I understand that there are likely some people who need to eat meat, perhaps because they are allergic to enough foods that a healthy diet can only be maintained by eating meat. So absolute right – no of course not – frame of reference is important.

Many people have a frame of reference that is rationalized into something like, ‘it is okay for someone else to do something, so therefor it must be ok for me to do that as well’. This is not a good frame of reference and leads to many poor or wrong choices.  I do not beleive that treating everyone the same is a fair way to treat people.  For example, it is acceptable for a 6 year old to engage in certain behaviours that it is not acceptable for a 3 year old to engage in. Further, it is acceptable for a 6 year old to engage in activities that it is not acceptable for a 30 year old to engage in. Further still, there are activities for 30 year olds that are not acceptable for 6 year olds. The permutations can continue, but I think the point is made. Before an understanding of right or wrong can be achieved by someone, they need to think hard and carefully about what they want and why they want it. This step is often missed by people and a short term approach (typically slightly hedonistic) is often adopted when in the long run this will likely not lead to a desired outcome. I believe this because your actions, while in the short term may bring you joy, speak very strongly about who you are and other people will begin to understand who you are and what you believe by your actions. If your actions do not match your words, then people will not heed your words; your ‘word’ will become meaningless.

I don’t want to leave the impression that there is only one way to be right – this is clearly not correct. I do want to leave the impression that you are responsible for your actions. Those moments of choice that are presented to us daily and your response to them directly affect who you are and how people perceive and understand you. The choices made will define you and root you in a particular universe (or said differently, but with a slightly different meaning, your actions will define the people with whom you are most likely to spend time with and the activities you are likely to engage in). If you find yourself in a universe that you do not like, then I suggest that you have the power to change it, but only by thinking hard about what is right and what is wrong and deciding to act upon your choice of right and wrong. Some people will disagree with you and oppose your actions, particularly when you begin to act upon your decided notion of right and wrong, but fighting through that opposition is the first step in changing universes. "With great power comes great responsibility" (Stan Lee, creator of Spiderman).