This week's column accomplished a first in my reading: I laughed out loud twice!
On a serious note, it's worth noting that lawyers are often the one's advising clients against admitting a mistake: If you admit you made a mistake, and apologize for it, then "we've lost any hope for defending you against [whatever it is that's being charged]." Admittedly, I'm a layman here, and while I understand the arguments against being naively transparent, it does seem to me that if we ALL leaned more toward operating in good faith--which at a minimum involves admitting mistakes, apologizing, offering grace-- there'd be far less need for the litigation epidemic that threatens to paralyze the courts. [How's that for naïveté!]
Thanks for your vulnerability. It's an example for others, myself included.
I have no idea what you are talking about… ahem…
This week's column accomplished a first in my reading: I laughed out loud twice!
On a serious note, it's worth noting that lawyers are often the one's advising clients against admitting a mistake: If you admit you made a mistake, and apologize for it, then "we've lost any hope for defending you against [whatever it is that's being charged]." Admittedly, I'm a layman here, and while I understand the arguments against being naively transparent, it does seem to me that if we ALL leaned more toward operating in good faith--which at a minimum involves admitting mistakes, apologizing, offering grace-- there'd be far less need for the litigation epidemic that threatens to paralyze the courts. [How's that for naïveté!]
Thanks for sharing! I think a lot about failure too. One phrase that has stuck with me from a book I read this last year was "the optimal number of failures is not zero." https://joshbrake.substack.com/p/the-optimal-number-of-failures-is-not-zero
Looking forward to checking out the Petroski book!