We now live on a gravel road that needs periodic maintenance. And so we find ourselves dependent on road contractors. We’re on our second one. The first we ‘inherited’ from the couple who sold us the house. My husband had the dickens of a time getting him both to commit AND show up to work.
The second one has turned out to be unreliable as well.
Each day this past week Scott was supposed to have come. And each day my husband fumed. Finally he contacted a builder friend to ask for a recommendation for someone else. A passing comment from our friend changed my thoughts and conclusions.
It turns out that the gravel guy is ‘having problems’.
That’s it – a new idea! The possibility that there might be a DIFFERENT REASON than what I had supposed – a cavalier, unprofessional approach to business, changed my conclusion.
Before, I was reasoning like this:
Premise 1 – All ‘no-shows’ in business appointments are evidence of shoddy management and/or poor character
Premise 2 – Scott is a ‘no-show’
Conclusion – Therefore, Scott’s way of running his business is evidence of shoddy management and probably poor character!
Now, I reasoned to a different conclusion because my major premise had changed:
New Premise 1 – Some ‘no-shows’ in business appointments are evidence of shoddy management and/or poor character
New Premise 2 – Scott is a ‘no-show’
New Conclusion – Therefore, Scott’s way of running his business might be evidence of something other than shoddy management or poor character. It might actually be the effect of personal or family problems.
*
Just the possibility of a different reason that was impeding good business practices changed how I thought about this man. I actually prayed for him for the first time, instead of impugning his character.
It remains to be seen just WHO will repair our gravel road, but this experience has reminded me again of the danger of jumping to conclusions.
Question: – When have you made an assumption in error that led to a false conclusion?
Surprised by Logic 
Leave a Reply