Dial down the FREE Subscription for such premium content on our YouTube channel.
In medieval Europe, a young person started his career by selling newspapers, candies, and vegetables on the train. Then he joined a job and was fired from his first two jobs for being non-productive. Subsequently, he tried to put himself into innovative work or action. In this process, he failed 1000 times before inventing the light bulb but eventually succeeded and he invented many devices. He was none other than Thomas Edison.
If Edison had not taken the risk of pursuing his passion by doing wrong 1000 times then perhaps he would have sold newspapers and vegetables all his life. But he was never afraid to make mistakes and eventually achieved in discovery of the light bulb. It suggests that even when mistakes are made, the act of attempting, learning, and adapting is far more valuable than remaining stagnant out of fear or indecision. While acting wrongly carries its risks, the cost of doing nothing – wasted opportunities – can be far greater.
Decoding high cost of doing nothing
Inaction, especially in moments of crisis or change, leads to stagnation. This can be catastrophic at both individual and collective levels. At the personal level, a person who avoids taking risks in their career out of fear of making a wrong move may remain unsatisfied. Similarly, at the societal level, Societies that fail to address pressing issues such as climate change or inequality pay a high cost in the end when people suffer from the same.
On the same line, from the prism of morality, doing nothing in the face of injustice or suffering can carry severe moral consequences. Silence or inaction in the presence of wrongdoing is explained by the political philosopher, Hannah Arendt as “Banality of evil“. For example, inaction towards Israel’s continuous occupation in Ghaza set the wrong precedence in the context of global governance. It may further lead to chaos in the world sphere.
The intrinsic values of doing wrong
Mistakes are often our greatest teachers. When we act, even wrongly, we get insight into what works and what doesn’t, allowing us to refine our approach and make better decisions in the future. Similar to the Thomas edition, In 1979, ISRO under the leadership of Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam launched the mission of SLV-3 (Satellite Launch Vehicle). It went to spin. Instead of putting into orbit, it fell down into the Bay of Bengal. Next year in 1980, he became successful. It shows the value of doing wrong which helps in improving and getting the result delivered.
Along with this, many of humanity’s greatest advancements came through trial and error. Scientists, inventors, and innovators often had to risk being wrong to discover breakthroughs. For example, the development of vaccines and medical treatments often involves failed experiments. These “wrongs” are necessary steps in the pursuit of solutions that save lives. By accepting that mistakes are a natural part of the growth that fosters a culture of action and innovation.
Similarly, the US and the Soviet Union both faced numerous failures in their efforts to explore space. However, their willingness to act despite risks and setbacks led to high achievements, such as landing a human on the moon. On the same line, activists like Savitribai Phule who challenged the caste system and biased social norms, often faced criticism and setbacks. However, their willingness to act, even when outcomes were uncertain, led to transformative social change.
Other side of the coin: Refrain from recklessness
While the statement emphasizes the importance of action over inaction, it does not suggest recklessness. Acting without consideration can lead to unnecessary harm, waste, or further problems. It is important to balance the urgency of action with the responsibility. For example, a policymaker who rushes to implement a poorly considered law without consulting experts may inadvertently cause more harm than good as we have seen in farm laws. It forced the government to take back these three laws.
Similarly, wrongs should not be done consciously. Bonafide mistakes -“in good faith”- are acceptable and not malafide – “in bad faith”. For example, mistakes made by the administrator for corruption can’t be praised. Therefore, “doing wrong” should be clear and concise it should be done from the lens of learning. Any other wrong intentions like corruption, making a loss to the concerned organizations, taking revenge, etc are not virtuous deeds.
Action is needed for doing wrong and improve
Bhagwat Geeta stressed focusing more on “action” than “speech/thinking”. When people focus on action, they commit mistakes and subsequently learn from mistakes. Over the period of time, the concerned person goes closer to perfection. In contrast, when a person only thinks and doesn’t take action, he misses opportunities and gets nothing at the end. Similar to Bhagwat Geeta, Karl Marx, and Hannah Arendt in their political philosophies stressed more action than thinking.
Similarly, people often hesitate to act due to the fear of failure or the consequences of making a mistake. It occurs when excessive overthinking prevents action, even in situations that demand urgency. For instance, in the business sector, companies that hesitate to innovate due to fear of failure risk falling behind those competitors who are willing to experiment, even at the cost of occasional missteps.
However, the pursuit of flawless decisions often leads to inaction, as individuals wait for ideal circumstances or perfect solutions that may never materialize. While mistakes provide opportunities for growth, inaction leads to regret, missed opportunities, and the perpetuation of existing problems. For example, those who are not participating in the UPSC exam would definitely get nothing from the concerned example. However, those who are trying their attempts have chance of getting selected.
In conclusion, action and thinking are two essential aspects of human behavior, each playing a critical role in shaping outcomes and progress. Therefore, extremities either in action or thinking are not desirable. Therefore, there is a need for a balanced approach between the two. “Action without proper thinking” is equally not good as “thinking without action”.
Read more Essays here – Link for more essays
Support us
Hard work should be paid. It is free for all. Those who could not pay for the content can avail quality services free of cost. But those who have the ability to pay for the quality content he/she is receiving should pay as per his/her convenience. Team DWA will be highly thankful for your support.
