Oh, let's not allow one of our great landmarks to be held hostage by crazy people, barriers and nets are just ugly and won't save anyone, people who want to kill themselves will do it one way or another.

I used to think that. Then I read about that study and changed my opinion.

That's how it's supposed to work, right?

That's how it's supposed to work, right?

People dig in. I do it, and it takes awhile for me to chart a new course. I don't know why it's so important to be right about some things that have so little affect on my life. I just hate looking stupid. And it's hard to readjust and say, "oh, I thought something that isn't true, and now I have the correct information, which is good.

I equate wrong with stupid. I don't want to be any stupider than I already feel. So I'll protect bad knowledge as if it's something important, like my index finger.

nets are just ugly and won't save anyone

Didn't a safety net actually save a bunch of workers who were building that bridge?

That's how it's supposed to work, right?

So one would think. The people who keep posting the study always add, "This is good news. These things work! They save lives, not just right that minute, but long-term! That's good, isn't it?" It's sickeningly disheartening to see so many people actively fighting against good news. Sure, they'd have to admit that they're wrong, but they're wrong because things are actually much more hopeful and beneficent than they think. How is that not the best possible way of being wrong?

Didn't a safety net actually save a bunch of workers who were building that bridge?

Well, sure. Good honest hard-working people who work, not crazy people the world will probably be better off without anyway (to be fair, nobody's said that this time around, but numerous people did last time, a couple of years ago).

As a kid, I learned that insisting you're right when it later turns out you were wrong is very embarrassing. Ever since then I've tried to always admit when I'm wrong. It's taken a lot of practice but I've gotten good at it.

I equate wrong with stupid.

Yeah, that's not good. But it's easier to admit you're wrong when you know others will not think you're stupid for it. My boss and I both have gotten very good at admitting when we're wrong and not holding it against each other when the other one is wrong.

I mean, my boss will still get mad if I do something careless or if I slack off, but he doesn't get mad if I make an honest mistake.

It's also a self-protection measure. Victim-blaming is often a way of saying, "this can't happen to me, because that person is stupid, and I'm not stupid."

Victim-blaming is often a way of saying, "this can't happen to me, because that person is stupid, and I'm not stupid."

Yeah, lots of this.

Man, I do not want to go to the gym today.

What was your time? (I ran mine in about 45 minutes, but "run" is a strong term for what I did.)

About 46 minutes, I think. The full race route apparently was 3.5 miles rather than 3.1, which I thought was mean. I also wouldn't call what I did "running".

If I could magically lose those last 20 pounds, I'm sure it would be easier on my knees.

I hate to be wrong as much as anybody else, but I discovered a while ago that admitting to being wrong is much the same as out-nicing people. You leave them floundering and take much wind out of the sails of "nyah, nyah, nyah you were wrong I was right" if you cheerfully pipe:

Huh. You were right and I was totally wrong. So where do we go from here?

I am a sneaky mean person.

That said, wrong does not automatically mean stupid. Stubbornly wrong...yeah, that's encroaching on stupid territory, but just not knowing? Not stupid.