The positive definition of compromise

Compromise / Compromised 

Per the Webster Dictionary in my office the first two definitions of the word are:

1.) a settlement in which each side gives up some demands or makes concessions.

2.) a modifying adjustment of opposing principles, systems, etc. by modifying some aspects of each. Middle ground.

Per the Roget’s Thesaurus in my office. synonyms are adjustment, settlement, arrangement.

Compromise though, has another meaning (definition 3.) that essentially means to discredit or put under suspicion. 

I find it interesting that a single word can have such disparate meanings. 

Adjustment, settlement, arrangement versus discredit or suspicion. 

In today’s hyper political world, just the use of the word compromise (i.e.: “we may be able to find middle ground”) by any leader immediately moves that person to someone to be mistrusted. 

By contrast – the word “leader” is defined as “a person or thing that leads; directing, commanding, or a guiding head of a group or activity”. So, in this hypersensitive world our leaders are not given the latitude to “compromise” less they be considered “compromised”.

In our society we elect people to represent us to use their judgement in our best interests, whether it be on the local, state, or national level. But today, by default, the two sides in an election – for or against a candidate – seem to automatically go to definition three of the word. The winner of the election is seemingly bound by the result, leaving no middle ground, while the No. 1 and 2 definitions of compromise become impossible.

My mom used to tell me that you have to listen to both sides of a disagreement to understand the opposing points of view and test them against your own understanding and that both sides usually have strengths and weaknesses. Listening can ultimately make the decision the right one because it is based on evaluation, some adjustments, and modifications. In other words – a compromise. In my mind – the positive definition.