CRWM series: Could one less Opinio n make a difference?

Come read with me #CRWM series: The series is solely inspired by my need to overcome my complacent attitude that I can’t work, take on responsibilities, and read a lot of books at the same time. It is my devotion to reading, hoping that this will propel me to read often and bring more people on this journey with me. There is a saying that goes, No one can read the same book twice. This series of articles are my take on the books that I read and the impression they make on me; therefore, I encourage all kinds of discourse. May we build a more thoughtful world, one word, one page, one story, and one article at a time. - Sherilyn Fernandes        

It was the early 2000s when I remember finding this book inside this dusty cabinet of our weathered old all-black glass cabinet. As a kid, I was always fascinated with nooks and corners, cramped spaces, spaces between cupboards, and my favorite table. We had and still have this antique Portuguese table that had a gaping space in between, probably to dangle your legs, but it was my favorite hideout. I always felt safe in small spaces. Moreover, I used to think that I'd definitely find a hidden treasure or some item that some adult had accidentally thrown around, and I would claim it as mine. I clearly remember finding this black glass opaque cabinet fascinating because it was huge and it always felt like it was hiding things from me. I would sit on the floor in front of it, put my hand inside, and bring out some fascinating item or other. Sometimes I found these beautifully shaped pepper shakers or salt shakers; we had owned a shack-restaurant back then. On one such adventure, I found this ultimate thing that got carved in my mind and about which I write with such fascination.

Growing up, I was the quietest, most sensitive, socially awkward, and most introverted kid you would ever come across. By then, my dad, who I used to hero worship, had passed away, and the dire needfulness that follows when you have only one parent supporting you made me crawl further in my shell, both figuratively and literally. I was a wallflower, and I never could understand where the overly enthusiastic kid vanished suddenly. It took me years to get past many of these fears, and oh! Books, as many introverts would agree, became my sole companions. So, guess what I found in that cabinet that day? Yep! A book, my dad’s book, the book that I held in my hand—I just made one wish: Oh, please help me! I want what the title claims because being a loner was exhausting. The book was How to Win Friends and Influence People, written by Dale Carnegie. This book, one of many, gave me something profound; it gave a 5th?grader hope. Oh! Don’t be surprised that I used to read such heavy books back then. My first self-read was the short story, The Little Prince by Oscar Wilde, and I can still remember the hot tears I cried when I first read it and the smell of the book. I was in 1st?grade.

The world population clock shows that right now, in 2024, 8.1 billion people are inhabitants of our planet. According to the ethnologue guide, there are 7,139 officially known languages that span across 195 countries. Some of the most recognized ethnicities are whites, African Americans, American Indians, Alaska natives, Asians, native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders. Undeniably, we humans are distinct, and over the years, wars have been justified because, even though we believe we are genetically different and wired differently, we still can’t get used to the simple fact that being different is normal and, therefore, should be acceptable. I am different than you, and maybe that’s why you want to know more about me and what I have to say, right? Or it can be sheer curiosity. Nevertheless, the basic need of this vast, completely distinct human species is one: to be recognized. Recognition is only possible through shared knowledge and a profound understanding of each?other.

HTWFAIP—How to win friends and influence people—is therefore giving us all an understanding of a fundamental requisite, as Carnegie puts it, “a deep, driving desire to learn, a vigorous determination to increase your ability to deal with people.” Some studies suggest that humans forget approximately 50% of new information within an hour of learning, so it is highly likely that you will forget this article in a few hours after reading it. So it would be wise if you acted while reading—just some brainy work.

Act 1: Go and find out about “two Gun” Crowley and the letter that he wrote. Page 28 in HTWFAIP talks about it, or you may as well Google it. The author points out how criminals rationalize their crimes. What about lay people, then? Your sneaky next-door neighbor, your nosey parker relative, or that one person who hates you for no reason at all, simply because you are in the vicinity? How do they rationalize their actions?

The first principle that the author talks about in his techniques for handling people is: don't criticize, condemn or complain.

You can’t even confront them, the reasons being:

1. You realize God has not seen fit to distribute the gift of intelligence evenly, duh!

2. You are trying to obey the commandment to love your neighbour as you love yourself, I guess!

Or, as Carnegie puts it, “criticism is futile... Criticism is dangerous because it wounds a person’s pride, hurts his sense of importance, and arouses resentment.”

Rightfully so, why would anyone take shitload from anyone when they are just walking in their lane minding their own business, right? But judgemental people always do whatever they do, thinking they are doing it for the greater good, or driven by a just cause your not-so-friendly neighbour included, and some fall on the extreme side of this radar. If you read the letter written by two-gun Crowley, you will understand why he is a prime example of this.

Carnegie mentions Hans Selye, a great psychologist. Selye once said, “As much as we thirst for approval, we dread condemnation.” Resentment, therefore, will never sit well with employees, family members, friends and never strangers. They will loathe you for it, for as long as they remember you, or just squirm in discomfort around you.

This reminds me: how many of our politicians have ever said that they are wrong? Although to err is human, right? Why sail the boat too far? How many of our parents have ever said that they are wrong? How well does any one of them take criticism?

Also, don’t many people justify criticism as a nudge to push you to do better? I once worked under a director who, to take credit for my achievement, justified his unjust, very personal criticism of me as being quite fair since it helped me achieve such a tremendous amount of success.

When Carnegie talks about withholding criticism, I am filled with perplexity… How are all these people, with their meanness, stupidity, and wickedness, allowed to go scot-free? For one reason and one reason alone. They never believe that they are doing anything wrong to begin with, and that makes any retention on our part pointless. As Carnegie points out, “we are not dealing with creatures of logic. We are dealing with creatures of emotions, creatures bristling with prejudices and motivated by pride and vanity.” For those who were ever scorched by harsh criticism that made you feel less worthy, Carnegie remarkably encapsulates, "Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain—and most fools do. But it takes character and self-control to be understanding and forgiving.”

Carnegie illustrates this further by mentioning B.F. Skinner’s classical conditioning. Good behavior rewarded is therefore long-lasting, and retention is gained. By criticizing, we incur more resentment than anything long-lasting, let alone a good bond.

The author also talks about Abraham Lincoln, whose life he studied for nearly a decade, and points out how Lincoln was heavily critical of everything around him; as a lawyer, he attacked his opponents openly in letters published in newspapers. Over the years, Lincoln toned down his censorious ways to understand that dealing with people meant not injuring their egos. Yet, the author points out one particular incident that Lincoln had every right to be critical of. The Battle of Gettysburg was fought July 1–3, 1863, in and around the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, by Union and Confederate forces during the American Civil War. The battle involved the largest number of casualties of the entire war and is often described as the war's turning point. The biggest cause of the Civil War was the humanitarian and economic issue of slavery. However, the four biggest factors of causation were slavery, states vs. federal rights, economics, and the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860.

As commander-in-chief, Lincoln was responsible for how the war was conducted. Carnegie narrates that on July 4, Confederate General Robert E. Lee was retreating southward in the midst of a storm, and when General Lee reached a particular point where the Union army was right behind him and an impassable river in front of him, Lincoln saw the God-given golden opportunity to capture the nearly exhausted Confederate army. So he ordered his general, Meade, to attack General Lee immediately. The fate of the whole country depended on it.

Lincoln telegraphed his orders, but for reasons best known to General Meade, he did quite the opposite of what he was instructed to do. Eventually, General Lee escaped, but, as expected, Lincoln was furious. In his anger, he wrote a rather reproaching letter to his general. What must have happened? The author asks in retrospect, well... years later, the letter was found among the president’s documents after his death, and it meant only one thing: he never sent it.

Carnegie guesses that the letter was probably never sent because Lincoln realized that from where he sat, it was easy to give his harsh opinion, but one less opinion wouldn’t harm anyone. Moreover, it would make General Meade probably think, Come on, bugger, you might as well come here and fight the battle (in my opinion, not the authors).

I would like to bring Mark Manson into the picture; he writes in his book, The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck. “People get addicted to feeling offended all the time because it gives them a high; being self-righteous and morally superior feels good.”

Carnegie points out why criticize to begin with, and Manson, in his counterintuitive approach, points out why bother to begin with? The take is that Carnegie is trying to win friends, and to win friends, family, or neighbors, you have to let go of toxic ways, especially in sensitive situations. I would take Manson’s advice to heart when dealing with those people who don’t even know my second name. That means letting the child play in the milk that he spills to make him know that he’s loved and cherished more than any mindless mistake. And letting go of those countless criticisms you have faced from nosey parkers with, "I couldn’t care less about your opinion,” candor. In this social media-cultured world, with numerous people suffering because of mindless criticism, we can try not to “critize, condemn, or complain." Maybe it’s time to drive our passions towards better pursuits.

And what about politicians or employers whose approaches are not so appealing? I would say to share your opinion if only you were willing to back it with action. Not happy with the power concentration—vote wisely; not happy at all with the employer—speak up or quit instantly. You don’t have to win these people over; you have to act with conviction to do what’s right.

HTWFAIP’s principle should also be a reminder that you don’t need a thousand friends; you just need a few honest ones that care deeply about your well-being, and if you are kind to them, or at least try you have already won.

Act 2: Read Father Forgets, a two minute piece, written by W. Livingstone Larned, while directing us to this profound read, Carnegie directly quotes Dr. Johnson to bring it to a full circle: ‘God himself, sir, does not propose to judge man until the end of his days.’ Why should you and I?

?