Learning with Losing
Sometime ago, Ryan and I were walking with the kids and he told about an interesting Ted Talk on “Arguing”. It was by Philisopher Daniel H. Cohen and he talks about the winners and losers in arguments. Traditionally we think of someone winning an argument and someone losing an argument. But Cohen suggests that it is the “loser” of the argument that actually walks away with the biggest gain. The winner walks away with nothing but a stroked ego. The loser on the other hand, walks away with a new belief– a “well articulated, examined, battle-tested belief.”
Last week, I was working on a Washington Post crossword puzzle and a whole section stumped me. After revisting the clues again and again without any new insight, I surrendered and decided to Google on my phone. It was, in my mind, the act of defeat. The act of a loser.
The very first clue I decided to Google was “Vanzetti’s Co-Defendant”. And just that like that I was enthralled. The rest of the evening, I found myself immersed in and fascinated by The Sacco and Vanzetti Trials of the 1920s, almost a century ago now. I read account after account until it was well past my bedtime. I read about the questionable aspects of their trials and conviction. I read about the world-wide protests, how renowed personalities such as Albert Einstein and H.G. Wells signed petitions urging another trial. I was surprised (and somewhat amused) at how generations before Johnnie Cochran and O.J. Simpson, there was another famous trial that prominently featured an article of clothing being too small.
Sacco Tries on a Hat, Simpson Tries on Gloves
Source: Boston Post
I never returned to my crossword that night. Days later, those boxes remain glaringly empty. But with a wealth of new information in my mind, I’m having a tough time feeling like I lost.
Entry filed under: Crossword.