
Positively Misguided: The Myths & Mistakes of the Positive Thinking Movement  - adambyrtek
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/09-04-15.html
======
barrkel
There's a kernel of truth behind positive thinking: that your feelings are
largely affected by what you think, and what you think is largely your own
choice. Conclusion: you are largely responsible for how you feel: anger,
despondency, sadness, etc., and certainly responsible for how deeply and how
long you let those feelings linger.

But this is more about avoiding negativity traps than it is building
delusional world perspectives. Going too far the other side is not quite as
bad, but bad nonetheless. You have to be realistic. And act. The reaction to
action ought to inform one of how things really are.

~~~
rjprins
Yes, but feeling good, doesn't make you act good.

Being realistic makes you more effective.

~~~
joe_the_user
The "Skeptics" began as a movement combating pseudo-science. Unfortunately,
many skeptics confuse the negative ability to refute clearly irrational belief
systems with the positive ability to offer prescription about how people
should live life or order society. Our "Skeptics" generally aren't scientists
and even science can't describe the best way to organize society. Unlikely
debunking UFOs, organizing society doesn't have easy villains and clear
proofs.

One problem is that many people with provably false belief systems still live
lives that they find satisfying and even make crucial contributions to science
itself. One can clearly demonstrate the irrationality of their belief systems.
One cannot clearly prove that they would do better in life if they adopted
different belief systems - this isn't saying that they wouldn't but rather
that this is a much more complex and nuanced question to address, something
that skeptics have failed to consider.

~~~
philwelch
It seems to me that the whole "skeptical" movement has long run out of useful
things to debunk (UFO's, astral projection, homeopathy, etc.) and have taken
to just pissing in everyone's cereal.

------
Evgeny
“You can be president of the Unites States, if you really want to!"

This one motivates person to at least try his best

A more truthful message would be, "You have much higher odds of being struck
by lightning than of ever becoming president of the United States"

This one motivates the person to sit on his backside and do nothing.

My guess would be that if everyone was thinking in terms of "truthfulness", we
would not have a civilization at all. After all, there's always more chances
to NOT make a discovery than to make one, to NOT become the next Google than
to become one, to NOT find a new continent than to find one etc.

And of course, he was going to miss a few blocks. But, suppose that everything
else is equal - training, physical abilities, skill, and your opponents are
ready to give it all and fight for each ball, while your teams is expecting to
miss a few here and there - who would have better chances?

~~~
scott_s
Being "ready to give it all and fight for each ball" and "expecting to miss a
few here and there" are not mutually exclusive.

One is a statement on commitment. The other is a rational assessment of the
likely outcome.

The last section of the article is perhaps the most important. It contains
this paragraph:

 _After surveying and studying that database, Hill has identified key
characteristics that enabled these dieters to achieve their impressive
results, and he has distilled them down to a series of tips. Among the first
tips is this: Expect failure…but keep trying._

~~~
Evgeny
This 'expect failure' bit just does not sound right to me. 'Do not fear
failure' - maybe, or 'don't get discouraged by failure', or something like
that.

Rational assessments can prevent commitment. Only one out of millions becomes
an Olympic champion (rational), why even try? (lack of commitment as a result
of rational assessment)

~~~
scott_s
Why sugar coat it? You will fail along the way. A lot. If you expect it,
you're less likely to see failures as disastrous.

It's the people who continue on despite knowing that today's effort won't make
much difference that can achieve great things. It will make _some_ difference,
but not much. But added up over years, you've achieved something significant.
Any single Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu practice I attend won't make much difference in
how good I am. But five years worth of consistently showing up despite that I
now have a purple belt, and I compete in the advanced division in competition.
Any given day I show up at the office won't make much difference in my
research, but five years worth of that means I'm close to my PhD.

------
Evgeny
"Let’s say that you are broke, overweight, and have no friends. You decide to
apply positive thinking. You tell yourself that you are lucky to be you and
walk around with a smile on your face."

Ugh, that's positive thinking gone terribly wrong. I guess, he should tell
himself that he'll lose 500g bodyweight this week ... and next week ... and
stick to it. And apply for X jobs this week, and next week and ...

But, wait, let's be truthful, odds are high of staying overweight and jobless.
Why bother then?

~~~
ahoyhere
Because a positive attitude -- not lying to yourself -- gives you a reason to
try, to create the environment in which good things _will_ happen to you.
(Working up the nerve to say hi to a stranger, volunteering at a charity,
throwing away the sugar in the house.)

------
Tichy
“you have within you the energies you need to heal”

While obviously there are diseases that don't heal themselves, it seems to me
the human immune system is a lot more complex and fine tuned than anything
physicians could offer at the present time. I suspect most medical treatments
are somewhat akin to operating with a sledge hammer. Therefore it seems to be
preferable to find a way to let the human immune system (and regenerative
capabilities of the body) do it's job than to go about it with medications and
operations. Of course sometimes there is no choice, but in general it seems
worthwhile to ask "why can't the immune system fix this by itself?" - which
probably leads to an attempt to treat the causes, rather than the symptoms.

------
neilo
Is the author poking holes in delusional optimism, a mere pocket of
positivity, or honest self-esteem? Isn't the point of believing you can do
something (being positive) so you try harder to achieve it and not just (as it
seems to be written here) wait for it to fall in your lap?

------
syntaxfree
The dude might be Michael Shermer, but he's still overdoing his ads by placing
them an entire screenful before the blog post.

------
brc
Blind optimism in the absence of supporting evidence is silly, yes, but
maintaining no semblance of positive attitude is also silly.

I think a large part of why motivational speaking/writing is over the top is
that, at most, people only take away and action a certain percentage of what
they are told. So you need to give them 200% to get them to absorb 80%.

To misquote 'if you think education is bad, you should try ignorance' : 'if
you think positive attitude is bad, you should try a negative attitude'. It
pays to be positive, but it also pays to fold and admit when you're wrong. I
think it's the latter part many people are suffering from, not the former.

------
mroman
In my experience, the "positive" business types (those to whom reality and
facts are "negative" if those don't fit their agenda) are in reality some of
the most negative, vicious, two-faced, double talking, backstabbing,
manipulating, thieving humans in existence.

I had a brother like that once, and he was THE most negative person in the
world when it came to me . . . amazing! My ex-wife too!

If you ask me, when it comes to most of those types of people, the whole
"positive" thing is just mental and emotional masturbation plus crack.

I can only be real in life. "Positive" or "negative" are just illusions that
cloud the FACTS.

