The Difference Between Being Consistent And Leading By Example

Consistency can be conceived as a personality trait, a position towards a particular question, or a property of reasoning. In addition, aligning our thoughts and life experiences has been proven to be a positive reserve in our psychological health.

Today and frequently, we hear the statements of public figures in terms of leading by example and their subsequent congratulations . Social networks have promoted in a dizzying way the materialization or outsourcing of values, which are essentially invisible.

However, the materialization of a morally rewarded behavior can be camouflaged under a repertoire of values ​​or other behaviors that can be unethical. For example, donating money to the classes that need it most can be an action. However, this donation may be questioned by some if the money has been produced unethically (eg drug trafficking).

The importance of contextualizing

At this point, it would be necessary to reformulate: what is the example? Is it something that depends on a concrete materialization, an external evaluation or a pre-established action? By having more resources to lead by example, is the one who preaches with him more exemplary? The answer is no. Leading by example would have to do more with the firstborn meaning of coherence.

According to the  Pan-Hispanic Dictionary of Sayings , by Delfín Carbonell Basset,  preaching by example indicates that ‘ one must do what he wants others to do ‘, while the expression  practice with  example, probably originated by the similarity between the verbs preach  and  practice, it does not appear collected in the corpus of our language.

For its part, the word coherence has its etymological origin in Latin, coaherentia , which means internal connection and designates the quality of what presents an internal and global connection or relationship of its different parts to each other. This definition highlights the internal nuance as indispensable in its conceptualization. However, “leading by example” seems to give greater relevance to the external component, which is behavior, as if it were a necessary or sufficient condition.

Thus, a behavior or a repertoire of “exemplary” behaviors does not determine coherence, since the cognitive component – such as the one referring to an assumption of ethical values – is an essential condition. Consistency can be assessed through the relationship that our own experiences or history have with our thoughts and decisions . Due to its entire or global character, it is related to Aristotle’s phrase, later collected by Gestalt psychology, The whole is more than the sum of the parts.

The truth as coherence

This difference in nuances in the concept of coherence is often forgotten in everyday language, both meanings being used interchangeably . This has also happened in the philosophy studies of The Theory of Coherence. According to Rescher, this theory has not historically been a monolithic doctrine, but has taken significantly different forms.

The theory of truth as coherence has been studied in the famous Vienna Circle , turning out to be a conventional approach. This theory was criticized for its circular thinking, questioning what it really means to be coherent.

Criticisms of this theory were brought to light by the German philosopher Schlick,  when Otto Neurath and Carnap seized upon a neopositivist theory of truth , warning that it was a circular approach and insisting on the presence of ethics in truth.

Coherence from the psychology of thought

From the psychology of thought, the valid forms of reasoning as well as the most frequent fallacies of thought are studied. One that we do when we think inductively is to believe that the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. On the contrary, a fallacy also occurs when we deduce a conclusion, without knowing the premises or even knowing them.

These biases in thinking can be observed in recent social phenomena such as post-truth or populism, among others . The latter can be an example of categorical syllogistic reasoning, in which the conclusion is drawn from an inadequacy of the major premise with the minor, giving rise to fallacious thinking.

Post-truth can be viewed as a type of formal and unconditional fallacy, called the consequent statement. This fallacy occurs because a second element is affirmed and it is wrongly inferred that its antecedent is true.

When making any judgment, assessment or measurement , it is convenient to remember Einstein’s contribution in his field, when he referred to the existence of hidden variables. For him, in reality, the results of the measurements should be predictable, and if we cannot do it, it is because there is information that we do not know. He called this information “hidden variables” of reality.

Consistency and health

In 1987, Antonovsky proposed the concept of sense of coherence (SOC) as a salutogenic variable, mediating health in stressful situations. This construct has been studied as a measure of resilience, and is related to self-esteem and better resistance to stress.

The positive value of coherence has been studied in a constructivist type of therapy, which is called coherence therapy. This therapy integrates in an interesting way what has been effective in the clinical practice of psychology, confirmed by neuroscience.

The coherence therapy obtains effective results, managing to intervene in the blocked emotional experience and integrate it into the memory to make a meaning conscious. In other words, it tries to restore the individual or re-establish his personal and global coherence.

This entire or global character, which makes up the truth of the individual’s experience, is the main characteristic of coherence. The truth serves as a guide or light to move us on a path; sometimes dark, sometimes light. Each person has had different experiences and even so, we know reality to a certain extent, so, rather than trying to follow a particular example, it is necessary to know our cornerstone , which is coherence.

The value of coherence, being an invisible value, seems to have gone more unnoticed in recent times or is less valued than an exemplary conduct or behavior, which makes more noise. And yet, and in silence, you may be being more consistent than the one who preaches or preaches by example. Knowing that there are more realities than we can deduce through a simple external connection  allows us to get closer to the truth, develop a greater open-mindedness and understand the ethical sense of coherence.