I get it but… to be correct is to be without error or in accordance with fact or truth.
The be right can either be essentially synonymous to correct- in which case they are the same thing; or it can be more abstract and simply pertain to what is morally good, accepted, or justified.
So in the former example there isn’t a real distinction beyond some nuance between right or correct as right is defined as “correct.”
In the latter example to be correct is simply to be factual where to be right is to be justified- this is especially important where there is no “universal truth” available- for example we might say it is “right” aka “good” to save a person from harm but it may not be a “correct” decision to do so, for example you may be harmed instead or make the situation worse, or save someone who later harms you etc.
Trying to define these things is inherently a matter of ego to some degree. When we attempt to pronounce wether something is “right” in the moral sense- we are saying that we carry the authority to define the morality of others. When we try to apply “correct” to ambiguous choices we go a step further in making ourselves the arbitrators or philosophy and culture. It is also important to remember that often times there is more than a singular example of correct or in the moral sense “right.” So if or when we imply there is a “right” and “wrong” vs. perhaps several of each or a vast spectrum it can make either egotistical.
Let us also keep in mind that how we define right or true or factual is subjective. Wether we use cultural values or personal values or even outcome to make the distinction- to distinguish means we are proclaiming our own authority on the matter.
The be right can either be essentially synonymous to correct- in which case they are the same thing; or it can be more abstract and simply pertain to what is morally good, accepted, or justified.
So in the former example there isn’t a real distinction beyond some nuance between right or correct as right is defined as “correct.”
In the latter example to be correct is simply to be factual where to be right is to be justified- this is especially important where there is no “universal truth” available- for example we might say it is “right” aka “good” to save a person from harm but it may not be a “correct” decision to do so, for example you may be harmed instead or make the situation worse, or save someone who later harms you etc.
Let us also keep in mind that how we define right or true or factual is subjective. Wether we use cultural values or personal values or even outcome to make the distinction- to distinguish means we are proclaiming our own authority on the matter.