UNIT II 2.3 IF YOU ARE WRONG, ADMIT IT - Dale Carnegie (BBA & BHM STUDY MATERIAL)

BBA & BHM STUDY MATERIAL

UNIT II 2.3

 IF YOU ARE WRONG, ADMIT IT

- Dale Carnegie

ANSWER BRIEFLY

1. Why did the author not muzzle his dog or keep it in a leash?

Rex, the author’s Boston Bulldog, did not like to be leashed or muzzled. The author himself did not like to muzzle or leash his dog.

2. What was the warning of the policeman?

The policeman warned Carnegie that he will be charged the next time he did not leash or muzzle the dog.

3. ‘I was in for it. I knew it’- What was the author in for? What did he know?

For disobeying him, Carnegie knew that he will have to face the wrath of the angry policeman itching to show his authority

4. How did the author and the policeman reverse their roles in their second meeting?

Carnegie tactfully admitted that he made a mistake and spoke all that the policeman would have, thus taking his side. The policeman calmed down and took Carnegie’s side by excusing Carnegie. This is exactly what Carnegie wanted.

5. Why did the policeman become magnanimous toward the author?

Carnegie admitted his mistake. This made the policeman magnanimously excuse him.

6. Why did Warren often leave the art editor in disgust?

The art director’s method of attack by finding faults with some little thing disgusted Warren.

7. How did Warren have a grand time with the art editor?

Warren embarked on self-criticism that took the fight out of his art director which Warren thoroughly enjoyed.

8. Why did Harvey go to his boss?

Harvey had erred by paying an entire month’s salary to an employee on sick leave. Since he was not authorized to decide the further course of action, he decided to admit his mistake to his boss.

9. Why did Harvey’s boss treat him with respect?

Harvey not only admitted his mistake but also blamed himself utterly for his mistake. This earned him the respect of his boss.

10. What was picturesque about Pickett?

Pickett was a confident man with auburn locks who a cap set at a rakish angle over his right ear.

11. How did Lee win admirers even after losing the battle of Gettysburg?

Lee, an honourable General, admitted that he it was entirely his fault. He maintained that he alone was responsible for the loss in the battle and none but he has lost the battle.

12. How was the problem of the Chinese father rooted in tradition?

Chinese tradition forbids elders from taking the first step to reconciliation with the young. Hence he did not try to seek his estranged son despite his strong desire.

13. How did Carnegie come to know about the Chinese father?

The Chinese father was the class member of Michael Heung, Carnegie’s course tutor in Hong Kong.

14. Bring out the contrary aspects in the character of Hubbard.

Hubbard had the rare characteristics of turning his foe into friends by taking their side when he felt he was right.

15. What should we do when we are right?

When we are right, we should try to win people gently and tactfully to our way of thinking.

ANSWER IN A PARAGRAPH

 1. How did the author turn the majesty of law into a merciful human?

Carnegie knew that to show their authority is the psyche of most people in high ranks. So, Carnegie admitted his mistake and made the policeman feel important. The policeman thus gave in to the self-condemned admittance of the guilty Carnegie by excusing him magnanimously.

2. How did Warren take the fight out of his art editor who was always delighted in finding faults?

Once Warren understood the situation he took the fight out of his art director by instantly admitting his mistake. He criticized himself extensively and promised to redo the entire work. This forbade the art director from picking out a volley of mistakes. His intentions were thus marred by Warren taking his side.

3. How did Harvey handle a tense situation and win the admiration of his boss?

Harvey not only admitted his mistake but also repeatedly blamed himself for all the confusion. The boss was so pleased at the guilty Harvey’s acceptance of mistake that he allowed Harvey to rectify his mistake. From that moment he developed a deep admiration for Harvey.

4. What was sublime about Lee’s confession?

Lee was an honourable man of high rank. While he could have blamed several others for the loss in war, he sought to admit that it was his fault alone that lead to the doom of their army. This is totally uncharacteristic of a man of such high rank. His acceptance of mistake and supplication of apology is the most sublime.

5. How did an extraneous factor block the Chinese father from admitting his mistakes? How did he overcome it?

Despite knowing that it was his fault for his son leaving him, the Chinese father did not budge since it was their tradition that forbade elders from taking the first step toward reconciliation with their younger counterparts. But his desire to meet his son and his family and the realization of his mistakes over powered his long nurtured ego. Full understanding of Carnegie’s words to ‘admit one’s mistake emphatically’ made him decide to break the tradition and seek his son.

6. How would Hubbard handle irritated readers?

Hubbard had the rare characteristic of pulling an irritated reader to his side by confessing that just like them he too disagrees with what he had written earlier. He would also call them over to his place to thrash the subject over. This way he ditches the fumes of an explosive reader.

ANSWER IN 200 WORDS

1. How did the author and Warren minimize their mistakes and win a forgiving and generous response in the process?

            Both Warren and Carnegie chose to take the side of their opponent by playing their part. They extensively criticized and self-condemned themselves that were supposed to have been their opponent’s part. The other persons would be so dumb-struck that their option was only to take Warren and Carnegie’s side and excuse them.

            The spontaneous admittance of their mistake won them the respect they wouldn’t have received otherwise. In Warren’s case he also got his pay check and commission. Both believed that self- criticism was better than having to listen to criticism from alien lips.

2. How did Harvey and Lee win admiration by not searching for alibis?

Harvey and Lee chose not to blame others for their mistakes. They went out of their way to admit their mistake. Harvey and Lee thus won the hearts of their seniors. Lee was an honourable man of high rank. While he could have blamed several others for the loss in war, he sought to admit that it was his fault alone that lead to the doom of their army. This is totally uncharacteristic of a man of such high rank. His acceptance of mistake and supplication of apology is the most sublime. He was heralded in history for his indomitable character of acceptance of mistake thus diminishing the pathos of the Gettysburg battle.

Harvey, on the other hand, not only admitted his mistake but also repeatedly blamed himself for all the confusion. Though the boss had many others to blame for the mistake, Harvey chose not to fall for the easy way out of the whole mess. The boss was so pleased at the guilty Harvey’s acceptance of mistake that he allowed Harvey to rectify his mistake. From that moment he developed a deep admiration for Harvey.

3. How will you categorize the instances given by Carnegie? What do they tell us?

Carnegie has drawn examples from different walks of life. The casual instance of his encounter with the policeman runs parallel to Warren’s encounter with his art director where both switch roles with their opponent. They grab the opportunity to admit their mistake and criticize themselves for it, thus gaining sympathy and respect alike.

Harvey and Lee steer clear from choosing alibis to defend themselves. They take the blame on themselves and find solution to the crisis. Again, both Harvey and Lee gain respect in return. Harvey’s sincere admittance of his mistakes and repeatedly blaming himself alone for the whole mess gains him the admiration and respect of his boss. Lee was heralded in history for his indomitable character of acceptance of mistake thus diminishing the pathos of the Gettysburg battle.

The Chinese father for his part breaks an age old tradition to rid his guilt and to satisfy his desire to reconcile with his estranged son and his family. He leaves his ego behind and with all his heart seeks his son’s forgiveness.

A very different personality was Hubbard. He had the characteristic of luring his foes to his side by tactfully bringing them to think the way he did when he felt he was right. He would pull an irritated reader to his side by confessing that just like them he too disagrees with what he had written earlier. He would also call them over to his place to thrash the subject over. This way he ditches the fumes of an explosive reader. Admittance of mistakes, thus, works in each one’s favour.

source: priyadarshanisrikanth.blogspot.com