Around this time last year, I contemplated the value of conflicting positions, using the example of how the status of a hero is reinforced by his enemy.
Can the same value be applied to conflicting opinions?
Here is a scenario: I am in a crowd of 200 people. All of us work at a construction site. One day we are told that we will no longer have a lunch break. I know for a fact that one of my coworkers disagrees with this. I have mixed feelings.
In this case, is it better to keep quite in order to keep my coworker quite in order to let the company run better so that the building can be completed? Or is it better for me to speak up with my coworker and express difference in hopes that the rule may somehow be dropped?
The first option benefits the building contractors, the building occupants, and perhaps a few others, but it brings trouble to us construction workers (no lunch!).
The second option brings trouble to the contractors, occupiers, etc. but benefits us.
Who counts? And does it have to do with how large the population with the differing opinion? Or does it have to do with economic power? Or with how noble, righteous or sustainable the cause?
In many ways, I think this challenge - of finding a resolution to conflicts of opinion - is part of this world. It is a challenge we can't get rid of but that we should rise toward.
Can the same value be applied to conflicting opinions?
Here is a scenario: I am in a crowd of 200 people. All of us work at a construction site. One day we are told that we will no longer have a lunch break. I know for a fact that one of my coworkers disagrees with this. I have mixed feelings.
In this case, is it better to keep quite in order to keep my coworker quite in order to let the company run better so that the building can be completed? Or is it better for me to speak up with my coworker and express difference in hopes that the rule may somehow be dropped?
The first option benefits the building contractors, the building occupants, and perhaps a few others, but it brings trouble to us construction workers (no lunch!).
The second option brings trouble to the contractors, occupiers, etc. but benefits us.
Who counts? And does it have to do with how large the population with the differing opinion? Or does it have to do with economic power? Or with how noble, righteous or sustainable the cause?
In many ways, I think this challenge - of finding a resolution to conflicts of opinion - is part of this world. It is a challenge we can't get rid of but that we should rise toward.
Comments
Post a Comment