If you have made a mistake, do not be afraid of admitting the fact and amending your ways.

-Confucius

I never make the same mistake twice. This is because there are an infinite number of mistakes, and I keep making new ones. Fortunately, philosophy helps minimize the impact of mistakes by teaching a crucial aspect of wisdom: not committing the same error repeatedly.

One way to avoid repeating errors is skill in critical thinking. While critical thinking is now something of a buzzword bloated fad, the core remains as important as ever. The core is the methods of rationally deciding whether a claim should be accepted as true, rejected as false or if judgment about the claim should be suspended. Learning the basic mechanisms of critical thinking (which include argument assessment, fallacy recognition, credibility evaluation, and causal reasoning) is relatively easy. Reading through the readily available texts will provide the basic tools. But, as with carpentry or plumbing, merely having a well-stocked tool kit is not enough. A person must also have knowledge of when to use a tool and the skill with which to use it properly. Gaining knowledge and skill is usually difficult and, at the very least, takes time and practice. This is why people who merely click through a class on critical thinking or flip through a book on fallacies do not suddenly become good at thinking. After all, no one would expect a person to become a skilled carpenter merely by skimming a DIY book or watching a few videos on YouTube.

Another factor in avoiding repeating mistakes is the ability to admit that one has made a mistake. There are many “pragmatic” reasons to avoid admitting mistakes. Public admission to a mistake can result in liability, criticism, damage to one’s reputation and other such harms. While we have sayings that promise praise for those who admit errors, the usual practice is to punish such admissions and people are quick to learn from such punishments. While admitting the error only to yourself will avoid the public consequences, people are often reluctant to do even this. After all, such admission can damage a person’s pride and self-image. Denying errors and blaming others is easier on the ego.

The obvious problem with refusing to admit errors is that this will keep a person from learning from their mistakes. If a person recognizes an error, they can try to figure out why they made that mistake and consider ways to avoid making the same sort of error in the future. While new errors are inevitable, repeating the same errors repeatedly due to a willful ignorance is either stupidity or madness. There is also the ethical aspect of the matter since being accountable for one’s actions is a key part of being a moral agent. Saying “mistakes were made” is a denial of agency, to cast oneself as an object swept along by the river of fate rather than an agent rowing the river of life.

In some cases, a person cannot avoid the consequences of his mistakes. Those that strike, perhaps literally, like a pile of bricks, are difficult to ignore. Feeling the impact of these errors, a person might be forced to learn or face ruin. The classic example is the hot stove in that a person learns from one touch because the lesson is so clear and painful. However, more complicated matters, such as a failed relationship, allow a person room to deny their errors.

If the negative consequences of one’s mistakes fall entirely on others and one is never called to task for these mistakes, a person can keep making the same mistakes. After all, they do not get the teaching sting of pain trying to drive the lesson home. One good example of this is the political pundit, since pundits can be endlessly wrong and still keep on expressing their “expert” opinions. Another good example is in politics. Political parties can also embrace “solutions” that have never worked and relentless apply them whenever they get into power. Other people suffer the consequences while the politicians generally do not directly reap consequences from bad policies. They do, however, routinely get in trouble for mistakes in their personal lives (such as affairs) but the consequences vary based not on the misdeed so much as the person.

While admitting to an error is an important first step, it is not the end of the process. After all, merely admitting I made a mistake will not do much to help me avoid that mistake in the future. What is needed is an honest examination of the mistake in terms of why and how it occurred. This needs to be followed by an honest consideration of what can be changed to avoid that mistake in the future. For example, a person might realize that his relationships ended badly because he made the mistake of rushing into it too quickly, by getting seriously involved without developing a real friendship.

To steal from Aristotle, merely knowing the cause of the error and how to avoid it in the future is not enough. A person must have the will and ability to act on that knowledge, and this requires the development of character. Fortunately, Aristotle presented a guide to developing character in his Nicomachean Ethics. Put simply, a person must do what it is they wish to be and stick with this until it becomes a matter of habit (and thus character). That is, a person must, as Aristotle argued, become a philosopher. Or be ruled by another who can compel correct behavior, such as the state.