• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Being Humbled

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
My experience that is people have a very difficult time being humbled and admitting something they did or said was wrong. I've seen this quite often in life, and it is especially prevalent here on RF. Rather than being humbled and admitting they made an error or were incorrect about something, they will continue to argue in an attempt to "save face," often leaving a debate with pie on it as a result.

If I make a mistake or am proven wrong on a point, I find it more productive to simply admit I was wrong and learn from the experience.

I'm not sure anyone particularly likes being humbled, but why, in your opinion, people will risk their reputation for honesty in order to not be seen by others as having been wrong about something?

As for me, I have more respect for someone who can admit to being wrong than I do for someone who belabors a point even though they know they're wrong just so people don't think they were wrong.

Of course, I might be wrong about all of this.

Your thoughts?
 

Marcion

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma
In religious discussions there often isn't a 'right' or a 'wrong' but a struggle of beliefs. So there is nothing to admit there.
In the case of facts I agree with you, it is better to quickly admit that you got it wrong.
Actually it feels very uncomfortable to uphold something that was proven to be wrong, it feels insincere.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
My experience that is people have a very difficult time being humbled and admitting something they did or said was wrong. I've seen this quite often in life, and it is especially prevalent here on RF. Rather than being humbled and admitting they made an error or were incorrect about something, they will continue to argue in an attempt to "save face," often leaving a debate with pie on it as a result.

If I make a mistake or am proven wrong on a point, I find it more productive to simply admit I was wrong and learn from the experience.

I'm not sure anyone particularly likes being humbled, but why, in your opinion, people will risk their reputation for honesty in order to not be seen by others as having been wrong about something?

As for me, I have more respect for someone who can admit to being wrong than I do for someone who belabors a point even though they know they're wrong just so people don't think they were wrong.

Of course, I might be wrong about all of this.

Your thoughts?
Personally, I'm always wrong. I beg you to like me for that.

Seriously, yes, it's a puzzle for me as well. I end up understanding it in the light of psychology. That's the only place I've found answers satisfactory to me.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
My experience that is people have a very difficult time being humbled and admitting something they did or said was wrong. I've seen this quite often in life, and it is especially prevalent here on RF. Rather than being humbled and admitting they made an error or were incorrect about something, they will continue to argue in an attempt to "save face," often leaving a debate with pie on it as a result.

If I make a mistake or am proven wrong on a point, I find it more productive to simply admit I was wrong and learn from the experience.

I'm not sure anyone particularly likes being humbled, but why, in your opinion, people will risk their reputation for honesty in order to not be seen by others as having been wrong about something?

As for me, I have more respect for someone who can admit to being wrong than I do for someone who belabors a point even though they know they're wrong just so people don't think they were wrong.

Of course, I might be wrong about all of this.

Your thoughts?
I guess it is a learning experience that some people lack. When you play competitive games or sports, you make a lot of errors and there is no denying. You analyse what went wrong and become better. Same goes for some jobs. I was a programmer. "When debugging is the activity to get errors out of a program, then programming is the activity to get them in." is a humbling proverb in the industry.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
To add further ... it's also another item on the list of behaviours that turns people off. Excessive bragging, condescension, proselytising, and not ever admitting to being wrong all cause others to avoid you if they can. On RF, I usually don't enter lengthy discussions with that type of person, as there's really no point. I might as well sigh, roll my eyes, and say, "Yeah I get it, you're right, and I'm wrong."

But for sure I don't think many folks who do it realise they're doing it. If they did, they'd change, and I also do know some who have changed.
 

John1.12

Free gift
My experience that is people have a very difficult time being humbled and admitting something they did or said was wrong. I've seen this quite often in life, and it is especially prevalent here on RF. Rather than being humbled and admitting they made an error or were incorrect about something, they will continue to argue in an attempt to "save face," often leaving a debate with pie on it as a result.

If I make a mistake or am proven wrong on a point, I find it more productive to simply admit I was wrong and learn from the experience.

I'm not sure anyone particularly likes being humbled, but why, in your opinion, people will risk their reputation for honesty in order to not be seen by others as having been wrong about something?

As for me, I have more respect for someone who can admit to being wrong than I do for someone who belabors a point even though they know they're wrong just so people don't think they were wrong.

Of course, I might be wrong about all of this.

Your thoughts?
Sometimes it can be a difficulty expressing the thought and articulating what is meant . I ve found that quite common on here . A point is made and perhaps hasn't been articulated very well , people then jump all over the mistake rather than what was intended, but came out badly . A little bit like this statement I've written lol .
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Sometimes it can be a difficulty expressing the thought and articulating what is meant . I ve found that quite common on here . A point is made and perhaps hasn't been articulated very well , people then jump all over the mistake rather than what was intended, but came out badly . A little bit like this statement I've written lol .

Is that the responsibility of the writer or reader?

It helps when one is impeccable with one's word. Failure to do so, in my experience, creates as much drama as making assumptions about what one says.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
How do you know whose right or wrong when talking of religion?

What criteria let's one know they are wrong?

RF people tend to talk pass each other. Whether they are wrong, I'd ask maybe if one is correcting the other on a fact.

Religious wise, one can't be wrong just have different perspectives of what other people say.

I genuinely don't like speaking of things as a fault of others: Someone have too much pride. Someone expresses too much ego. People talk too much. It leaves out people can be right. Pride can be healthy. People's views should be valued.

This is just from personal experience. It's healthy to humble when you know you're wrong just don't feel devalued for your opinion just because "you" realized you're wrong.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Are you suggesting the two never overlap?

Yes. Unless talking about say theology. I see a difference saying someone is wrong about the trinity and being wrong if one believes the trinity was never taught given historical evidence.

What personal religious views can be wrong? And to whom?
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Those that conflict with objective evidence. And to those that find truth in objective evidence, I suppose.

Why use objective criteria to test if subjective beliefs and experiences are right or wrong?

If someone said your belief X is wrong because it's not objective does the other need to humble and accept that person is right?

That and what does that solve?
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Why use objective criteria to test if subjective beliefs and experiences are right or wrong?

If someone said your belief X is wrong because it's not objective does the other need to humble and accept that person is right?

That and what does that solve?

Why are you trying to change the subject and start a debate here?

The question in the second paragraph misrepresents what I said.

If someone who has claim X is shown objective evidence Y that refutes claim X, what does that say about claim X and the person that made the claim?
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Why are you trying to change the subject and start a debate here?

The question in the second paragraph misrepresents what I said.

If someone who has claim X is shown objective evidence Y that refutes claim X, what does that say about claim X and the person that made the claim?

No I am not.

I just don't see discussions as passive. I like questions, curiosity, asking for clarity, and express my opinion.

Does it need to be a debate to share differing views? :(

I wasn't getting to all of that. I was saying that I can see people humble and say they are wrong if the facts are wrong. If we apply objective criteria to subjective experiences that's judging the validity of a person's experiences not correcting them.

I just see a difference. Pointing that out isn't debating unless we should all agree and sing kumbiya.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
No I am not.

I just don't see discussions as passive. I like questions, curiosity, asking for clarity, and express my opinion.

Does it need to be a debate to share differing views? :(

I wasn't getting to all of that. I was saying that I can see people humble and say they are wrong if the facts are wrong. If we apply objective criteria to subjective experiences that's judging a person's experiences not correcting them.

I just see a difference. Pointing that out isn't debating unless we should all agree and sing kumbiya.

This thread is about being wrong and admitting one is wrong, not questioning another's subjective experiences.

It appears to me that you're trying to make the intent of this thread to appear to be an attack against religion or spirituality. I can assure you it's not.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
This thread is about being wrong and admitting one is wrong, not questioning another's subjective experiences.

It appears to me that you're trying to make the intent of this thread to appear to be an attack against religion or spirituality. I can assure you it's not.

My last two paragraphs connected the two.

Say you and I talked about religion. You said I was wrong. I say I am not. Should I humble to being wrong or does the topic of religion not appropriate in a right or wrong scenario?

Refer to #2 so you can kinda get what I'm saying.

No need to debate. I'm just giving a non common perspective because I don't believe just because we are wrong we need to be humble to admit it. Like my original reply, I can see that based on facts but not subjective experiences.

Whether you want to debate my answer is on you. But my point is the same...humility depends on the topic and subjectivity of it. Love is another example. Among others.
 
Top