From my organizer page...

[jay]

"A first failure may prepare the way for future success." --Arnold Lobel

I know this to be true in science, and to some extent in engineering and business. I wonder how applicable it is in relationships, though... I've read some accounts that if one isn't successful in making a connection (of whatever sort) initially, the likelihood of future success falls off dramatically. Or does it?

Comments

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

a higher probability of eventually connecting with that person? I don't know, but I'd say probably not.

Then the thesis statement wouldn't hold true in relationships. A bit depressing.

it's hard to get accurate feedback about exactly what went wrong sometimes

Unlike in science -- a failed experiment or crashed experimental plane is usually traceable with enough analysis. So extracting lessons-learned would be hard, too. Also depressing. Hmmm.

[curiousangel.livejournal.com]

The thesis statement says "may prepare for future success", not "must prepare", so I don't know that I'd say it's totally disproved. You're getting into optimist/pessimist/realist territory there, and defining the difference between them can be difficult sometimes.

You infer conclusions based on whatever data you can come up with. You won't ever have all the data, nor will you ever be operating under perfect conditions. You do the best you can anyway. Sometimes, you will fail.

Based on what has gone on upthread, I'd say that "first failure" can have many different meanings. If it's simply a case of not really clicking with someone, then you may well be able to change it at some point in the future. If you've managed to seriously offend someone, it'll be much harder to overcome, although perhaps not impossible. If there are fundamental objections to your nature, then you may never be able to overcome them without making changes to yourself that you can't (or won't) make.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

True... "may prepare" is no guarantee of improved odds, later.

And sometimes one has to create a theory based upon what one knows to be incomplete (or worse, flawed) data... and just be willing to revise, or be willing to fail again or be publicly wrong -- without taking it personally. At least, that's how it seems to work in technical fields. How it works in relationships... I don't know, really.

Fundamental objections are non-starters... usually those come up relatively soon and people part ways without much loss or exposure. Just like I can quickly conclude that a given instrument or design won't satisfy experimental or project requirements. ("I need 20 digital I/O channels and five analog channels, not a board with ten each, or another disk-controller." "Anyone that gets close to me must be kid-tolerant, because I have three energetic boys.")

Wrong-footedness may be harder to correct, because it is based on less information. If the offense is large, one may never get a second data point -- a second chance with that person.

Not clicking at first... that's salient, at least for me. It takes me typically months to get to know someone well enough to begin to notice that I'm attracted to them -- and to trust them -- and by that time, the given person may have decided that I'm not interested in themselves, and gone on. No click, but timing might have made a difference. I lost a potential relationship that way, a couple of years ago.