Someone tells me: I really like your principle of … it confirms my way of doing things …

In conversations it is important to clearly distinguish between rules and principles.

If we read the online definitions, we understand the misunderstanding, the two words seem to call to each other. Looking more closely however, we’ll note that a rule is similar to a prescription, to be followed therefore, point by point, and that a principle is similar to a proposition (often fundamental) that serves as a basis for implementation (which is not defined).

This implementation of this fundamental proposition (the principle) can lead to prescriptions, to rules.

It is important to understand that principles underpin the rules that we apply. That we should therefore make the connection, and understand the principles, which normally change much less frequently than rules.

That we can have plenty of very different rules between different contexts that nonetheless respond to the same principles.

It therefore seems damaging to start a conversation with a rule. And yet it’s so much easier, because it doesn’t require explanation. A rule is prescribed. We may not be aligned on the rule, but perhaps we are on the principle.

(Dilts pyramid, Bateson’s logical levels, rules and principles are at different levels. But if there is no coherence, no resonance, there is dissonance. It is always damaging.)