7 ms·

This is quite an issue in my life. Believing and practicing positive thinking seems like such a self-evident, unquestionably good thing. Especially among a cert

by benched 13y ago

This is quite an issue in my life. Believing and practicing positive thinking seems like such a self-evident, unquestionably good thing. Especially among a certain class of people, it's almost never popular or ... I don't know - "socially tenable" to challenge this. But I can't help but challenge it. Because to me, it just looks like a nervous tic. In fact, it looks like a stubborn, neurotic horse that insists on only turning to the right. It looks compulsive, and subtly fear-driven. In conversation, it's a non-stop, predictable and inescapable barrage of "Yeah, but", "Well, on the bright side", "Hey, at least" - and no matter what I say, they won't stop returning like it's tennis and they're scrambling all over the court to stop the ball going out of bounds by any means. And the people who do this are as offended by my view of the world as if I spilled shit on their white suit. I'm biased, but I don't see myself as overly negative. The way I see it, I just don't go out of my way to see the bright side, or try in a motivated way to hit positive notes while conversing. I don't feel motivated to be negative, either. But this sure as hell makes me the most negative person I know, by default. To me, I just can't have a view of the world other than the view I have; and I can't speak things other than what I think and see. From the other side, for myself, I have been guilty of the same thing in the past. But since I became more aware of it, I now try, when someone talks about bad luck or unpleasantness in the world, to listen and nod, rather than allow my larynx to reflexively spasm into a positive platitude. No, I am not fun at parties. Not to worry - I don't go to them. Also, yeah I think criticizing positive thinking in general, and The Secret in particular, both in the same short article, is pretty sloppy.

Florin_Andrei 13y ago
> it's a non-stop, predictably and inescapable barrage of "Yeah, but", "Well, on the bright side", "Hey, at least" In moderate dosage, it is useful to blunt negativity and hopelessness, which can also cause failure. But use too much of it, and you're lost in la-la-land. As they say, it's all in the dosage... I think the positive thinking method would get a lot better if it focused less on the outcome, and more on the process. Don't focus on having the great job and enjoying it, focus on the qualities that it takes to get there.
- benched 13y ago
  Personally, I tend to agree with your second paragraph. I would much rather hear "Run! Run!" than "We can still make the bus!"
  - Florin_Andrei 13y ago
    What most people today think about spirituality is childish at best, a hideous deformation at worst. "The Secret" is an instance of that. I've spoken with some Orthodox monks in Eastern Europe, where I grew up. Some of them (a rare few, yes) are surprisingly un-dogmatic, and focused on spirituality instead. Take their prayer for example. It's not so much a naive conversation with an imaginary deity, as most people think. It's more like an old-school mental self-programming technique. They instruct you to never say "give me money", but instead say "give me the strength to attain success" - and visualize it, the process, not the result. They emphasize that you remain the material agent; if you're "given" anything, it's the mental conditions that boost motivation and clear thinking. Even from a purely material and scientific perspective, I'm definitely fine with that view, give or take a metaphoric understanding of the process of "giving" (it's ultimately a change in your mentality that occurs due to prayer and visualization, and even they emphasize that the way the change happens is a mystery better left alone if you're practical-minded).
    - saraid216 13y ago
      > Take their prayer for example. It's not so much a naive conversation with an imaginary deity, as most people think. It's more like an old-school mental self-programming technique. This is historically very, very common. Any deep dive into religious mysticism of any type will immediately blur the line between self-programming and conversation. It's not great (though hardly impossible) as a route to secular authority so it's rarely the dominant understanding.
dubfan 13y ago
I've had a similar outlook for most of my life and have faced the same response. The criticism I faced for simply being realistic and pointing out flaws in the "power of positive thinking" was overwhelming and made me think there really was something wrong with me. It wasn't until I was out of the American public school system that I was able to completely distance myself from these ideas and associate only with people who were similarly realistic and grounded (not negative).
- hosh 13y ago
  Grounding and solidity does not necessarily make something feel more real. Rather, grounding and solidity feels real to you. There are other modes of consciousness where less grounded and less solid experiences will feel real. It is also possible to train your awareness to slip between these different modes of consciousness. Most people tend to stick with one or two modes of consciousness as that feels the most familiar and comfortable. Further, depending on what kind of emotional triggers you have, you might be leaking a kind of emotion that is perceived as negative to other people. To you, you might be looking at something "realistically". Perhaps others are afraid to look at that stuff. Or perhaps, you have some form of aversion yourself where you avoid experiencing the "positive". (I cannot really tell just by reading your comment, just offering possibilities). In all these cases, I don't think there is necessarily anything wrong with a person, whether they are experiencing different modes of consciousness or they have aversions. Having said all of that, I had mentioned in other parts of the thread: "positive thinking" is usually taught incorrectly by people who suck at it. To use it correctly, you actually do have to look at what you don't want to look at. It is also not enough to think positively; you need to generate a different feeling until that feeling feels "real", from which the thinking will naturally shift into a different direction. As such, this kind of stuff requires quite a bit of skill with emotions.
  - redblacktree 13y ago
    Where would you suggest a person start if he wanted to gain this "skill with emotions?" That's a serious request. On re-reading, it sounds snarky, but I don't know another way to phrase it.
hosh 13y ago
"It looks compulsive, and subtly fear-driven. In conversation, it's a non-stop, predictable and inescapable barrage of "Yeah, but", "Well, on the bright side", "Hey, at least" - and no matter what I say, they won't stop returning like it's tennis and they're scrambling all over the court to stop the ball going out of bounds by any means." Yeah. Those people suck at it. You are absolutely correct that, use of "Yeah, but" and "Well on the bright side" "Hey, at least" generally indicates trying to gold-plate pig shit. As I have mentioned in other comments, "positive thinking" is a misnomer. You're really working with emotions, not thought. Thoughts arise from emotions. "Positive thinking" is not so much as using your language to try to gold-plat pig shit so much as tuning into the underlying emotions, and perhaps, shifting the emotions to a different shape. When that happens, the thoughts will arise in a different pattern. "I'm biased, but I don't see myself as overly negative." <-- A lot of negative people wading through their crap don't see themselves as negative. I speak from personal experience. I can say this kind of stuff now, only because I was able to tune into the darker emotions and learned how to release them. There are lots and lots of methods to do this, much literature, teachings, and trainings on this. The darker emotions stay within you and color how you experience the world; unless you've had a lot of training and practice at being aware of yourself, it is unlikely that you would even know how much crap you carry, though it would feel as if you were being neutral. (It isn't that you are neutral; it is that it feels normal to you). Perhaps, be open to the possibility that there are people who don't suck at this stuff. Observe what they do, the play of emotions running through them, and how they affect people around them. There are folks like that out there.
- lsc 13y ago
  >I was able to tune into the darker emotions and learned how to release them. There are lots and lots of methods to do this, much literature, teachings, and trainings on this. The darker emotions stay within you and color how you experience the world; unless you've had a lot of training and practice at being aware of yourself, it is unlikely that you would even know how much crap you carry, though it would feel as if you were being neutral. (It isn't that you are neutral; it is that it feels normal to you). I think it's pretty unbalanced to not have any darker emotions. I mean, certainly, one can take it too far, but I find this social pressure to be always happy to be... very fake, and very irritating.
lutorm 13y ago
My own line of thinking is close to yours. However, I think it's important to draw a distinction between trying to see the positive side of things and being realistic about outcomes. Because human emotions around happiness are very relative, the way you choose to think about your situation does affect your mood. On the other hand, just having blind optimism that things will work out in the future clearly is not helpful in motivating you to put in your best effort to make it so.
NDizzle 13y ago
We would probably get along fantastically. Your (our) way of thinking strongly reminds me of the "let it crash" philosophy. What are your thoughts on that?
- benched 13y ago
  Interesting that you would call that out. Yes, it so happens that as an approach to problem solving, that seems like one of the simplest to me. It's also a significant feature of my approach to programming - I've written code with minimal error checking for a long time, and it's never been a problem. Specifically, I avoid writing error checks motivated by an abstract worry that ill-formed inputs 'might' get into the system.

by benched 13y ago

Florin_Andrei 13y ago

> it's a non-stop, predictably and inescapable barrage of "Yeah, but", "Well, on the bright side", "Hey, at least" In moderate dosage, it is useful to blunt negativity and hopelessness, which can also cause failure. But use too much of it, and you're lost in la-la-land. As they say, it's all in the dosage... I think the positive thinking method would get a lot better if it focused less on the outcome, and more on the process. Don't focus on having the great job and enjoying it, focus on the qualities that it takes to get there.

benched 13y ago
Personally, I tend to agree with your second paragraph. I would much rather hear "Run! Run!" than "We can still make the bus!"
- Florin_Andrei 13y ago
  What most people today think about spirituality is childish at best, a hideous deformation at worst. "The Secret" is an instance of that. I've spoken with some Orthodox monks in Eastern Europe, where I grew up. Some of them (a rare few, yes) are surprisingly un-dogmatic, and focused on spirituality instead. Take their prayer for example. It's not so much a naive conversation with an imaginary deity, as most people think. It's more like an old-school mental self-programming technique. They instruct you to never say "give me money", but instead say "give me the strength to attain success" - and visualize it, the process, not the result. They emphasize that you remain the material agent; if you're "given" anything, it's the mental conditions that boost motivation and clear thinking. Even from a purely material and scientific perspective, I'm definitely fine with that view, give or take a metaphoric understanding of the process of "giving" (it's ultimately a change in your mentality that occurs due to prayer and visualization, and even they emphasize that the way the change happens is a mystery better left alone if you're practical-minded).
  - saraid216 13y ago
    > Take their prayer for example. It's not so much a naive conversation with an imaginary deity, as most people think. It's more like an old-school mental self-programming technique. This is historically very, very common. Any deep dive into religious mysticism of any type will immediately blur the line between self-programming and conversation. It's not great (though hardly impossible) as a route to secular authority so it's rarely the dominant understanding.

dubfan 13y ago

I've had a similar outlook for most of my life and have faced the same response. The criticism I faced for simply being realistic and pointing out flaws in the "power of positive thinking" was overwhelming and made me think there really was something wrong with me. It wasn't until I was out of the American public school system that I was able to completely distance myself from these ideas and associate only with people who were similarly realistic and grounded (not negative).

hosh 13y ago
Grounding and solidity does not necessarily make something feel more real. Rather, grounding and solidity feels real to you. There are other modes of consciousness where less grounded and less solid experiences will feel real. It is also possible to train your awareness to slip between these different modes of consciousness. Most people tend to stick with one or two modes of consciousness as that feels the most familiar and comfortable. Further, depending on what kind of emotional triggers you have, you might be leaking a kind of emotion that is perceived as negative to other people. To you, you might be looking at something "realistically". Perhaps others are afraid to look at that stuff. Or perhaps, you have some form of aversion yourself where you avoid experiencing the "positive". (I cannot really tell just by reading your comment, just offering possibilities). In all these cases, I don't think there is necessarily anything wrong with a person, whether they are experiencing different modes of consciousness or they have aversions. Having said all of that, I had mentioned in other parts of the thread: "positive thinking" is usually taught incorrectly by people who suck at it. To use it correctly, you actually do have to look at what you don't want to look at. It is also not enough to think positively; you need to generate a different feeling until that feeling feels "real", from which the thinking will naturally shift into a different direction. As such, this kind of stuff requires quite a bit of skill with emotions.
- redblacktree 13y ago
  Where would you suggest a person start if he wanted to gain this "skill with emotions?" That's a serious request. On re-reading, it sounds snarky, but I don't know another way to phrase it.

hosh 13y ago

"It looks compulsive, and subtly fear-driven. In conversation, it's a non-stop, predictable and inescapable barrage of "Yeah, but", "Well, on the bright side", "Hey, at least" - and no matter what I say, they won't stop returning like it's tennis and they're scrambling all over the court to stop the ball going out of bounds by any means." Yeah. Those people suck at it. You are absolutely correct that, use of "Yeah, but" and "Well on the bright side" "Hey, at least" generally indicates trying to gold-plate pig shit. As I have mentioned in other comments, "positive thinking" is a misnomer. You're really working with emotions, not thought. Thoughts arise from emotions. "Positive thinking" is not so much as using your language to try to gold-plat pig shit so much as tuning into the underlying emotions, and perhaps, shifting the emotions to a different shape. When that happens, the thoughts will arise in a different pattern. "I'm biased, but I don't see myself as overly negative." <-- A lot of negative people wading through their crap don't see themselves as negative. I speak from personal experience. I can say this kind of stuff now, only because I was able to tune into the darker emotions and learned how to release them. There are lots and lots of methods to do this, much literature, teachings, and trainings on this. The darker emotions stay within you and color how you experience the world; unless you've had a lot of training and practice at being aware of yourself, it is unlikely that you would even know how much crap you carry, though it would feel as if you were being neutral. (It isn't that you are neutral; it is that it feels normal to you). Perhaps, be open to the possibility that there are people who don't suck at this stuff. Observe what they do, the play of emotions running through them, and how they affect people around them. There are folks like that out there.

lsc 13y ago
>I was able to tune into the darker emotions and learned how to release them. There are lots and lots of methods to do this, much literature, teachings, and trainings on this. The darker emotions stay within you and color how you experience the world; unless you've had a lot of training and practice at being aware of yourself, it is unlikely that you would even know how much crap you carry, though it would feel as if you were being neutral. (It isn't that you are neutral; it is that it feels normal to you). I think it's pretty unbalanced to not have any darker emotions. I mean, certainly, one can take it too far, but I find this social pressure to be always happy to be... very fake, and very irritating.

lutorm 13y ago

My own line of thinking is close to yours. However, I think it's important to draw a distinction between trying to see the positive side of things and being realistic about outcomes. Because human emotions around happiness are very relative, the way you choose to think about your situation does affect your mood. On the other hand, just having blind optimism that things will work out in the future clearly is not helpful in motivating you to put in your best effort to make it so.

NDizzle 13y ago

We would probably get along fantastically. Your (our) way of thinking strongly reminds me of the "let it crash" philosophy. What are your thoughts on that?

benched 13y ago
Interesting that you would call that out. Yes, it so happens that as an approach to problem solving, that seems like one of the simplest to me. It's also a significant feature of my approach to programming - I've written code with minimal error checking for a long time, and it's never been a problem. Specifically, I avoid writing error checks motivated by an abstract worry that ill-formed inputs 'might' get into the system.