Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about the idea of being “right” and “wrong.” This issue is not merely a theoretical area of debate; it is something I encounter in my daily life, directly affecting my decisions and emotions. Is it really possible to do everything right? Or is believing that we always do everything right actually healthy? And if we make a mistake… what really happens? Do the choices we believe we knowingly make “wrong” necessarily have a single, clear explanation?
When did right and wrong become so decisive in our lives? Who draws these boundaries, and how? And why do we judge, criticize, or on the contrary reward ourselves according to these lines?
I think these questions are important. Because when we feel “wrong” or believe that we are not doing something right, we often begin to question not only the behavior, but ourselves as well. The feelings of guilt, shame, and anxiety that emerge at this point can lead a person to seek help and sometimes to therapy. My motivation for writing this text arises precisely from here: to explore the psychological dimension of the perception of right and wrong and to address it together with my own thoughts.
The Psychological Construction Of Right And Wrong
In fact, these questions do not have a single answer. Both the effort to “do everything right” and the determination of what is considered “right” are based on far more complex processes than we tend to think. From a psychological perspective, perceptions of right and wrong can be shaped contextually and subjectively. One reason we struggle to make sense of behaviors we believe we knowingly did “wrong” is this: we try to find a single cause.
Yet our past experiences, what we have learned, our habits, fears, and the environment we are in all influence this process together. For this reason, the more we try to resolve why a behavior is “wrong,” the more complex the issue can become.
What I mean by “trying to do everything right” is exactly this: when we think we have done something wrong, we often respond in disproportionate ways. We get angry at ourselves and keep turning the same thoughts over in our minds for a long time. Then similar questions arise: “Why did I do it?” or “Will I do it again?” However, these questions are often formulaic and exhausting.
A “wrong” to which we attach great meaning may be completely insignificant to someone else. This can lead to the following fallacy: “If it’s insignificant to someone else, it should be insignificant to me too.” Yet since everyone’s perception of right and wrong is nourished by different experiences, this comparison is often not functional.
Social Context And Moral Uncertainty
The influence of the social environment in the formation of this perception is quite significant. The family we grow up in, our friendships, or people who enter our lives later can directly affect how we evaluate what is right and what is wrong. Sometimes, the reaction of a friend can be more decisive for us than a judgment coming from our family.
The paradox here is this: the concepts of right and wrong can be flexible and variable, yet we attribute a great deal of certainty to them. As this certainty increases, confusion becomes inevitable.
Another challenging aspect of this way of thinking is its relationship with anxiety. In daily life, we often act according to established mental templates without questioning whether something is truly right or wrong. At other times, due to the fear of “doing something wrong,” we may refrain from saying what we actually want to say or from taking a step. Thus, while the perception of right and wrong maintains its flexibility on the one hand, it becomes one of the structures that restrict us the most on the other.
Freud, The Superego, And Internalized Guilt
To make sense of this complex process, Freud’s psychoanalytic theory offers an important framework. According to Freud, the human mind consists of three structures: the id, the ego, and the superego. While the id represents instinctual drives, the ego tries to align these drives with the conditions of reality. The superego represents internalized moral rules and social norms.
Questions such as “Should I do everything right?” or “What happens if I do something wrong?” are often the result of a conflict between the ego and the superego. According to Freud, even if a person does not make an objective mistake, they may experience intense guilt due to a rigid superego. Therefore, feelings of guilt do not always depend on reactions from the external world, but also on internal moral judgments.
This highlights how guilt can become disconnected from actual behavior and instead rooted in internalized standards that may be unrealistic or overly punitive.
When Moral Questioning Becomes Paralyzing
So should these internal processes be “corrected”? In fact, thinking about right and wrong is part of human nature. Questioning a behavior from a moral perspective is, of course, important; however, what is decisive here is how this questioning functions in a person’s life.
Is it guiding, or does it become paralyzing? Does it create excessive rumination and anxiety, or does it support healthier decision-making? That is the exact criterion. The perception of right and wrong is personal, and what matters here is not the frequency of the thought, but how it makes the person feel.
Our strong attachment to right and wrong can be explained by different theories; however, Freud’s approach is particularly meaningful to me. Because by placing this process on an instinctual level, it allows us to remove these experiences from being an individual “flaw” and to consider them as a human condition that anyone can experience. This perspective is often relieving.
Some of our thoughts center on the need to question right and wrong, and this can sometimes be exhausting. There are moments when we get lost in this questioning; perhaps sometimes getting lost is inevitable. However, while getting lost, it is important to notice how this makes us feel and how it affects us.
Thinking is, of course, valuable; but it gains meaning when we think without forgetting ourselves.