The Principle of Wrong

Always, 'wrong' is defined as something 'not true' or 'false' and not in between. Wrongly said statement is considered a lie. Rightly said statement is also a lie if the outcome flipped. This is wierd. Right statement should be right no matter how the outcome turns out.

Consider a teacher, holding a sweet. The teacher then asks the students to write what it it that she is holding. So some may write jibberish like 'zxsht', some may write 'shweit', some may write 'sweet', some may write 'sugar', some may write 'sucrose'. Obviously the 'zxsht' is wrong, so is 'shweit', so is 'sugar' and so is 'sucrose'. But is it really wrong? It seems unfair. We know that 'zxsht' is definitely wrong. But 'shweit' is at some degree, is correct compared to 'zxsht'. And 'sugar' more correct compared to the previous two. And the 'sucrose', definitely is a highly thought answer.

The argument suggests that the level of untrue is highly relative. Its relativity is measured by how much it differs from the 'correct' outcome or answer. For example, if a statement is true but the outcome turns out to be the opposite of the true answer of the true statement, then the statement is still true because relative to the correct answer, the statement is still true. Similar to the case of 'sweet' and 'sucrose'. For 'sucrose' is not a correct answer that the teacher is looking for, but the weight of the meaning of the answer 'sucrose' relative to the question is higher compared to the other answers except the true answer 'sugar'.

In summary, wrong shall not be taken as total wrong or total untrue. One have to know of how correct the wrong is relative to something. Correct wrong is a definite wrong if the relative point of measure is totally opposite in all characteristics and principle.