Rabbi Daniel Z. Feldman
Lashon Hara, one of the many principles taught in this week’s Torah reading of Kedoshim, is a well-known and frequently emphasized concept in Judaism, and yet is a challenging one to understand. It is commonly taught (based on the writings of Maimonides and of the Chafetz Chaim) that Lashon Hara refers specifically to disparaging remarks that are true, in contrast with motzei shem ra, which is slander. However, if that is the case, it is difficult to understand why it is prohibited. What is wrong with telling the truth, if indeed that’s what it is? Even if it leads to negative results for the subject, wouldn’t they be appropriate and deserved?
There are many elements to draw upon to explain this, beginning with the postulate that the distinction between lashon hara and motzei shem ra is somewhat overstated. Lashon Hara may be factual in some sense, but that does not mean it is actually true, whether in its content or in the impact that it brings about.
The content may be misleading, or flatly wrong, for countless reasons that don’t involve overt lying, including subjectivity, partial truth, faulty memories, and the myriad cognitive biases to which mortals are vulnerable.
Further, the impact can be false, in numerous other ways. The consequences are often disproportionate- and sometimes knowingly so. Often a sliver of negative truth will be seized as a pretext to justify mistreatment of the subject, a falsity and injustice in practice.
It is not only the subject that suffers from disproportionate negativity; society as a whole does as well. It is vitally important that a belief exists in the general decency and moral behavior of the average citizen; without that, the people live down to the perception of what they think the baseline is, a phenomenon detailed in Timothy Wilson’s book “Redirect: The Surprising New Science of Psychological Change”.
The book argues that the most effective way to change our behavior and improve our lives is not through massive willpower or long-term therapy, but through "story editing."
Wilson suggests that we all have internal narratives—stories we tell ourselves about who we are and how the world works. By using small, scientifically proven prompts to nudge these narratives in a healthier direction, we can create lasting personal and social change.
Here is a summary of the book’s core concepts and key takeaways:
1. The Core Concept: Story Editing
Wilson’s central thesis is that our interpretations of events matter more than the events themselves. If you fail a test and tell yourself, "I'm stupid," you will likely give up. If you tell yourself, "I didn't study hard enough," you are likely to try again.
Story editing involves redirecting these internal narratives. Wilson highlights three main ways to do this:
Story Prompting: Providing people with information that nudges them toward a more positive interpretation of their situation.
Writing Exercises: Using specific writing techniques to process trauma or clarify goals.
The "Best Foot Forward" Approach: Changing your behavior first, which eventually forces your internal story to change to match your actions (self-perception theory).
2. The Power of the Writing Exercise
One of the book's most practical takeaways is based on the research of James Pennebaker. Wilson explains that writing about a problem for as little as 15 minutes for three or four consecutive nights can significantly improve physical and mental health.
Why it works: Writing forces us to organize our thoughts and turn a chaotic, distressing experience into a coherent narrative. Once an experience is "labeled" and "filed away" as a story, we stop ruminating on it.
3. Why "Common Sense" Interventions Often Fail
Wilson spends a significant portion of the book debunking popular social programs that "sound" like they should work but actually cause harm because they reinforce the wrong stories:
D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education): Wilson notes it was largely ineffective because it inadvertently sent the message that drug use was common and exciting.
Scared Straight: These programs often backfire because they make the "tough" lifestyle look glamorous to at-risk youth or make them feel like they are destined for prison.
Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD): Forcing trauma victims to talk about an event immediately after it happens can actually "freeze" the trauma in their minds, preventing the natural healing process.
4. Applications in Real Life
Education and Achievement
Wilson discusses "Attributional Retraining." In one study, struggling college students were told that most students struggle at first but improve over time. This small "nudge" changed their story from "I'm not college material" to "I'm just going through a transition." This tiny shift led to better grades and lower dropout rates.
Parenting
Wilson emphasizes that the stories parents tell their children become the children's internal monologues.
Avoid Labels: Instead of saying "You’re a good helper," say "You helped a lot." This focuses on the action rather than a fixed identity.
The Praise Trap: Over-praising children for their "intelligence" can make them afraid of failure. It is better to praise their "effort" (Growth Mindset).
Happiness
The book suggests that we are remarkably bad at predicting what will make us happy ("affective forecasting"). To improve well-being, Wilson suggests:
Do Good, Be Good: Helping others changes our internal story to "I am a helpful, kind person," which increases long-term happiness.
Step Back: When thinking about negative past events, try to view them as a "fly on the wall" (distanced perspective) rather than reliving them.
5. Summary of Key Principles
Small changes, big results: You don't always need a massive intervention; you need a narrative shift.
Be a scientist: Wilson advocates for "evidence-based" living and policy-making. We should only use interventions that have been proven to work through randomized controlled trials.
Edit your story: If you are stuck in a cycle of failure or unhappiness, look at the story you are telling yourself. Use writing or behavior changes to "redirect" that story.
Conclusion
The "surprising science" Wilson refers to is the discovery that human behavior is driven by our subjective interpretations of the world. By becoming the "editors" of our own stories, we can redirect our lives toward better health, higher achievement, and greater happiness.
In fact, R. Yehoshua Leib Diskin understood that this is the reasoning behind the imperative to judge others favorably, also taught in this week’s reading . Rather than a service extended to those others, he posits, it is a necessity for the one judging: he will feel no motivation to maintain a standard of behavior if he doesn’t believe there is one.
The destructive impact of such attitudes is on display in the contemporary trend to try to tear down (figuratively and literally, in the case of statues) heroes of American and European history. This has been extended even to figures such as Winston Churchill, in the book “The War on the West”:
“If what Churchill did in his life doesn’t count for anything, then it is hard to see how any human action counts for anything. If Churchill’s good points cannot outweigh any bad points, then no one can ever do enough good in their lives. In other words, if we cannot get Churchill right, and get him in a proper perspective, then there seems little point in trying to do so with anyone else. Finally, there seems little point in trying to do anything good ourselves. The attacks on Churchill make all human endeavor seem futile, because if even defeating the greatest evil in history will count as nothing, and you will not be lauded for it in your own country even half a century after your death, then what good deed could ever count for anything?”
The damage wrought by both types of unfair impact are on full display through the treatment too often directed at the State of Israel. It is no coincidence that Israel is also the subject of its own prohibition of disparagement, dibat ha-aretz, the sin of The Spies.
No human being is perfect; Israel, however, is the only nation that it is expected to be perfect so as to be entitled to exist. Any flaw, real or imagined, is invoked to justify vilification not leveled at Earth’s most despotic regimes.
Quite the contrary; in many circles, the most evil actors on the planet are held in higher regard. This complete moral absurdity is a natural result of the distorted lens directed at Israel: if the noble achievements and aspirations of this nation of heroism and benevolence can be dismissed, what moral standard can exist for humanity?
