I Am Right, You Are Wrong

Observations (1990) by Dr. Edward De Bono.

The writer, psychologist and philosopher, Edward de Bono, “coined” the concept lateral thinking. His body of work in the field of creative thinking and thinking as a skill, is world-renowned. The definition of “world-renowned” here is that Dr. de Bono’s nearly 56 books have been translated into dozens of languages and sold millions of copies. Edward de Bono has also chaired a special summit of Nobel Prize laureates. Three Nobel physicists wrote forewords to “I Am Right, You are Wrong” (1990).

Dr. Edward De Bono. Born: May 19, 1933, Malta.
“An inspiring man with brilliant ideas. De Bono never ceases to amaze with his clarity of thought.” — Sir Richard Branson

Editorial Review, Publishers Weekly:

Advocating a perception-based mode of thinking free from rigid rationality, de Bono ( Six Thinking Hats ) hopes this manual will “signal the start of a New Renaissance.” He argues that “our existing thinking culture” overemphasizes rote logic and simplistic labeling of behaviors as right/wrong or always/never.
Deeply suspicious of language as a tool for argument or persuasion, he likens the brain to a “self-organizing system” that generates patterns, and he calls for a new “lateral thinking” to liberate the mind from the shackles of language-dependent thought.
Water logic,” adaptive and imaginative, will replace our confrontational, repetitive “rock logic.” This trendy how-to, which reads like a motivational seminar handbook, is full of catchy slogans and mixes byte-size nuggets with questionable assertions (“Humor is by far the most significant behavior of the human mind”). Three Nobel physicists have written forewords to this book, which includes techniques designed to jolt the mind out of familiar ruts.

I have always agreed with the following:

Most of our everyday decision-making tends to be confrontational. Whether in large meetings, one-to-one or even in our own heads, opposite viewpoints are pitted against each other. Ultimately, there must a winner and a loser. [This] ‘rock logic’ of rigid categories and point scoring arguments.. is both destructive and exhausting [and time-consuming].