Nagging is wrong.
We all probably are happier being right than wrong and you’re right that it’s better for you, too. The saying is more about the need to be acknowledged as being right. We have at least one person on this board for whom that is admittedly paramount. I don’t like him very much.
Yes, Dear.
Hold on, back up.
“You can be right or happy” is not that same as “I nag people until they give in.”
Now, my opinion on the statement that you can be right or you can be happy is largely in the context of marriage, where it’s emphasizing that couples often fight over really stupid things. It’s not worth creating a big argument when there’s not really much at stake in the first place - better to just live with it in some circumstances. (Of course, if you’re really miserable, then just living with it might not be an option.)
Nagging, on the other hand is a negative behavior in all contexts. Right or wrong, whether it works or not, nagging is just not a productive thing to do. Nagging is how weak people punish others for not doing what they want.
“Choose your battles.”
From the movie Broadcast News:
“Unless you’re a cow, happiness alone isn’t enough.”
Except that if you choose happiness over being right, in the long run there’s a good chance it’ll lead you to disaster or death; in all likelihood you’ll end up both wrong and unhappy. Reality doesn’t care what you want to be true, and ignoring reality is very dangerous.
Since this thread seems focused on the relationship aspect of this; imagine that your spouse insists that vaccines cause autism. You choose happiness over being right and let them have their way, so your child isn’t vaccinated. Then your child gets sick and dies of the disease the vaccine was meant to stop. Are you happy now? Probably not.
Well, yes, except I’ve literally never heard the expression "Would you rather be right or happy?"used about anything of real importance. It generally comes into play when people are arguing over which way the toilet paper hangs or how to load the dishwasher or who said what to Aunt Gracie last Thanksgiving. And like someone said earlier, it has less to do with being right and more to do with being acknowledged as being right. I can be absolutely correct about how to load the dishwasher and still be happy, but I’m not likely to end up happy if I insist that my husband acknowledge that my method is far superior to his.
I certainly have. I’ve heard it and variations on it used more often with important matters than unimportant ones, actually.
I’ve always heard it used like Doreen reports - it’s about learning to get over trivial squabbles that really don’t matter.
I could see it being used in other contexts where being right really does matter, but it’s actually still in keeping with the meaning of the phrase. With something like vaccination that does matter, I’ll trade happiness for rightness. It’s that important; if we have to have an argument it, then let’s do that. With something trivial like toilet paper orientation, I’m much better off aiming for happiness.
I’ve pretty much only heard this phrase as something my mother would often say. So, right there, it’s problematic. And by that, I mean, fucked up.
I can’t be happy unless I’ve got a decent grasp on the truth of whatever situation I’m involved with. I absolutely cannot deal with having to compromise what I know to be the truth of a thing just because someone I want to be in a relationship with is being stubbornly irrational. There’s no happiness there, anyway, so I might as well be right.
Of course, maintaining relationships only with people who are at least nominally rational, or who at least would like to be, means that I am almost never in a position where this phrase comes into play. It also means that I cannot maintain a relationship with my mother, but that’s to my benefit, anyway.
On the other hand, I have dealt with a few rare people who could well benefit from taking this old saying to heart. And not because of any issue with happiness, per se. I have encountered a few people who are so caught up with being righteous that they have lost all sense of proportion and empathy. And when you’ve gone that far around the bend, “being right” is not really something you’re capable of.
Altogether, this is one of those adages where, if it actually works for you, if you actually find it a useful tool for maintaining perspective, then, well, good for you. But, I feel that, for most people, there’s probably some other aphorism (“pick your battles”, for instance) that would get the job done without triggering the kinds of resistances this one does.
I generally hear it used by someone trying to defend believing in frauds; things like psychic & faith healing, mediums/channelers/ghost hunters/etc claiming to speak to or for the dead (and the afterlife in general), homeopathy and other quack medical treatments, etc.
If that’s your issue, you’ve got bigger problems than choosing whether to be happy or right. You married the wrong person.
ETA: You should divorce your spouse, and then you can be happy AND right. In this case.
Yeah, you should have known long-before having kids with this woman that procreation wouldn’t be wise.
The misery from “being right” only comes into play when you try and convince other people that you’re right. Possessing secret knowledge known to no one else can be extremely empowering.