<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How to Be Wrong</title>
	<link>http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/08/23/how-to-be-wrong/</link>
	<description>Hollywood Ending or Bust</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 22:15:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Traveling Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/08/23/how-to-be-wrong/#comment-183</link>
		<dc:creator>Traveling Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 00:08:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/08/23/how-to-be-wrong/#comment-183</guid>
		<description>I love your story, Kristin. You should post it on Facebook.

Also, I hope your grandmother recovers well (if it's anything to recover from). Mine is 90 and still going strong, but I've spent lots of time with my grandfather in a hospital room and know how stressful it is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[I love your story, Kristin. You should post it on Facebook.

Also, I hope your grandmother recovers well (if it's anything to recover from). Mine is 90 and still going strong, but I've spent lots of time with my grandfather in a hospital room and know how stressful it is.]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kristin</title>
		<link>http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/08/23/how-to-be-wrong/#comment-182</link>
		<dc:creator>Kristin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:49:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/08/23/how-to-be-wrong/#comment-182</guid>
		<description>Thanks for this article. Here is how this "need to be right" versus open debate played out for me recently.  I was sitting in my 87-year old grandmother's hospital room last week when one of her 50-year old friends came in for a visit. The friend started talking about how horrible health care reform will be, how horrible government-sponsored medicine will be, etc.  I looked over at my grandma, then looked back at the friend. I said, with respect, (a bit of forced) humility, and calm, "I have to disagree with you. Did you know you are actually sitting, right now, here in this room, next to someone who is actually utilizing government-sponsored health care (Medicare) and who is not going to have to pay more than a hundred dollars or so for an over $150,000 medical bill, for very excellent services rendered in a nationally-ranked hospital-- which are undeniably going to extend her life and improve her health?  What could be bad about that? You are saying government-sponsored health care won't work, while sitting in front of someone for whom government-sponsored health care is **actually working!** 

And would you not want the same if you were old, lacked resources, and had a disease that were going to cost your family over $150,000?"  When I said this to friend, I could see that flash of, "I want to be RIGHT," wash over her face. She then began to shut down and could only muster a half nod, albeit with an undeniable curiosity in her eyes, at which time my grandmother, God bless her, chimed in and said she believed I was right-- and that she had had nothing but good experiences for over twenty years with her government-sponsored health care.  It had helped her through cancers, surgeries, and now this.

I gave friend a minute or two...to see what would come next.  She then said, "But okay-- who will actually pay this medical bill!?  The taxpayers!"  And I said, "Correct. You and I are paying for the medical bill as we speak, as Medicare and SS taxes come out of our paychecks.  But, I am okay with that-- and looking at Gram, aren't you? I would want the same from my grandchildren when I am older, and I am fine with helping our country if it means no one will have to worry about being on the street due to one illness."

At this, friend stopped arguing. She went silent. I could only hope she might walk away with a slight perception change; maybe that was my own wishful thinking.  Here, that obsessive, FALSE self-esteem-driven need to be right, even in the face of in-person facts which challenged the "rightness," still won out, because all discourse stopped when the "rightness" became more obviously in question.  

This is not to say that I was expressly right, but that what saddened me about the exchange was one person chose to, "drop out" of a conversation about a critical topic that affects us all just because she likely felt her "rightness" was in question. REAL self-esteem (versus FALSE self-esteem)-driven communication would foster an ongoing exchange, even in the face of disagreement.  Self-esteem should function to give us strength to continue discourse even when it gets hard, not cause us to shut down when we are scared or unsure. I agree with you, Matt. When the need to be "right" wins, not just over logic and correctness, but also over simple communication and honest debate, we all lose.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[Thanks for this article. Here is how this "need to be right" versus open debate played out for me recently.  I was sitting in my 87-year old grandmother's hospital room last week when one of her 50-year old friends came in for a visit. The friend started talking about how horrible health care reform will be, how horrible government-sponsored medicine will be, etc.  I looked over at my grandma, then looked back at the friend. I said, with respect, (a bit of forced) humility, and calm, "I have to disagree with you. Did you know you are actually sitting, right now, here in this room, next to someone who is actually utilizing government-sponsored health care (Medicare) and who is not going to have to pay more than a hundred dollars or so for an over $150,000 medical bill, for very excellent services rendered in a nationally-ranked hospital-- which are undeniably going to extend her life and improve her health?  What could be bad about that? You are saying government-sponsored health care won't work, while sitting in front of someone for whom government-sponsored health care is **actually working!** 

And would you not want the same if you were old, lacked resources, and had a disease that were going to cost your family over $150,000?"  When I said this to friend, I could see that flash of, "I want to be RIGHT," wash over her face. She then began to shut down and could only muster a half nod, albeit with an undeniable curiosity in her eyes, at which time my grandmother, God bless her, chimed in and said she believed I was right-- and that she had had nothing but good experiences for over twenty years with her government-sponsored health care.  It had helped her through cancers, surgeries, and now this.

I gave friend a minute or two...to see what would come next.  She then said, "But okay-- who will actually pay this medical bill!?  The taxpayers!"  And I said, "Correct. You and I are paying for the medical bill as we speak, as Medicare and SS taxes come out of our paychecks.  But, I am okay with that-- and looking at Gram, aren't you? I would want the same from my grandchildren when I am older, and I am fine with helping our country if it means no one will have to worry about being on the street due to one illness."

At this, friend stopped arguing. She went silent. I could only hope she might walk away with a slight perception change; maybe that was my own wishful thinking.  Here, that obsessive, FALSE self-esteem-driven need to be right, even in the face of in-person facts which challenged the "rightness," still won out, because all discourse stopped when the "rightness" became more obviously in question.  

This is not to say that I was expressly right, but that what saddened me about the exchange was one person chose to, "drop out" of a conversation about a critical topic that affects us all just because she likely felt her "rightness" was in question. REAL self-esteem (versus FALSE self-esteem)-driven communication would foster an ongoing exchange, even in the face of disagreement.  Self-esteem should function to give us strength to continue discourse even when it gets hard, not cause us to shut down when we are scared or unsure. I agree with you, Matt. When the need to be "right" wins, not just over logic and correctness, but also over simple communication and honest debate, we all lose.]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Angela</title>
		<link>http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/08/23/how-to-be-wrong/#comment-181</link>
		<dc:creator>Angela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 03:55:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.filmtraveler.com/2009/08/23/how-to-be-wrong/#comment-181</guid>
		<description>You should change your name to Platothew Aristotleman.

I would have said something far more serious, but you know that we have almost identical views about this type of thing so I'll shut up now to avoid being redundant.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[You should change your name to Platothew Aristotleman.

I would have said something far more serious, but you know that we have almost identical views about this type of thing so I'll shut up now to avoid being redundant.]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
