Not too long ago, my husband and three-year-old daughter took our dog for a walk around our neighborhood while I was at work. As I was leaving and checking social media for the first time that day, I was blind-sided by a video of my family posted on the neighborhood facebook page. It showed our dog pooping on a neighbor’s grass. My husband did not have a bag, and did not pick up it up. I don’t condone this, however I do understand forgetting the bags in the commotion of trying to get the dog and the kid out the door. Been there. Done that.
The commentary on the video completely bashed my husband. The owner of the house ranted about his disgust for “people like this” punctuated by profanity. I was moderately frustrated that he thought it was okay to post the video to the facebook page. That frustration grew to anger when I read his words and a particular comment that called my husband several obscenities and suggested that if they were to meet on the street he would be in trouble. How is it that one act of inconsideration can reduce a person to completely invaluable and subject to hatred? Why do we conflate people with behavior and judge their morality based on isolated events? Is there a term for this?
Tom Garaghty, CEO and founder of Iterum, Ltd and psychology safety expert discusses the concept called “the fundamental attribution error”. This is when we attribute a person’s behavior to their character. We assume that a person is behaving a certain way because they are inherently a “bad person”. We often don’t look at the context of the situation before making this judgement.
After arriving home and ranting to my husband and 17 year old son, my mind continued to race with how I would respond. I had been tagged in the post comments and later received a direct message from the videographer’s wife. In my humanness I wanted to respond and call out these so-called neighbors. Thankfully I waited. I knew that if I responded at once it would only lead to more conflict, so I prayed for God to give me direction.
Clinical psychologist and CEO of “Good Inside” Dr. Becky Kennedy has an interesting take on this topic. We can evaluate a person’s behavior with what she calls a least generous interpretation (LGI) or a most generous interpretation (MGI). The fundamental attribution error would coincide with the LGI. That person did a “bad thing”, and therefore they are a bad person. “My child is having a meltdown in the store. She is such a selfish brat!” Looking at a situation with an MGI mindset would allow a person to consider the underlying reasons and context for the behavior. “My child had a meltdown in the store. Maybe she is tired or hungry.” After learning about the least and most generous concept, I discussed it with my kids. This is a great way to help them develop empathy and to understand that a person may behave a certain way because of how they are feeling on the inside and because of situations we know nothing about. We play games in the car when we see certain behaviors and think of reasons a person is exhibiting those behaviors. Practicing this skill strengthens their ability remain open-minded as they learn to navigate social relationships. It has also helped me navigate social interactions at work.
So, is it really wrong to think that people are inherently bad? Not necessarily. The problem is when we let those thoughts become words and actions. When we seek justice and react before taking a moment to consider how damaging our words and actions can be. I appreciate the views of both Tom Garaghty and Dr. Becky Kennedy, and I also love learning what Jesus has to say about how we should interact with others. Let’s consider the following verses:
“So now I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other.” John 13:34 NLT
“And why worry about a speck in your friend’s eye when you have a log in your own?” Matthew 7:3 NLT
“The tongue can bring death or life; those who love to talk will reap the consequences.” Proverbs 18:21 NLT
There are many other verses that explain how we are to treat each other. These parallel the concepts discussed. My neighbors let a moment of frustration fuel their desire for justice and reacted. However, I too let the situation frustrate me. I did not watch my words when talking with my family nor did I view my neighbor’s behavior through a “most generous interpretation” lens. I am thankful the Holy Spirit prompted me to wait before I responded out of anger. This experience reminded me to think of the above concepts and to remember Jesus’ words. The next time you are frustrated with the behavior of others, remember to mind your tongue, and give grace generously.
Leave a Reply