Does The Truth Even Matter?

As I never tire of telling anybody that is brave enough to listen to me, you can’t change without passing through the Discomfort Zone. Not this blog per se of course, but any significant change involves stepping outside of your comfort zone.

It’s easy to look at highly successful people and think, “Well yeh, but look at that person, I bet they’re always cool, calm and collected” Well unless their name is James Bond, Top Cat or they’re dead, then I vehemently disagree.

When anybody attempts something completely alien to him or her, it will feel weird for a period of time. If it doesn’t feel weird, then it’s not alien and they’re still within their comfort zone.

One of the reasons for me running a weekly guest post is to get alternate points of view. I know what I think and I want to challenge that thinking as well as yours rather than get stuck in a groove churning out the same ole, same ole. In other words, I want pulling out of my own comfort zone.

That doesn’t mean I only want posts that I disagree with, just that I lick my lips with eager anticipation when I get them.

I haven’t known Haider that long, but I like the cut of his jib. He’s opinionated in a good way, says what he thinks and says it in a coherent and intelligent way.

I’m not going to offer my thoughts in detail on what Haider suggests at this point because this is now his platform. I’ll either save them for the comment section or a follow up post.

Often with this blog the comments are the most fascinating part. Hearing what other people have to say on a subject that I may have thought was black and white can be enlightening and sometimes humbling. It’s the comment section where I sometimes have to admit I got it wrong like with this post, and then skulk away with my tail between my legs.

If you’re reading this via e-mail or a Reader, click through and add your two cents worth to the debate because I really do want to hear what you have to say.

Read on…

Does The Truth Even Matter?

When I heard that Tim was taking down his “Know Yourself Change Yourself” e-book from his site, I couldn’t pass up an e-book of Tim’s wittiness and ended up buying the book last minute!

While the book presents some very useful NLP techniques for changing beliefs and forming positive emotional associations, there was one idea that I strongly disagreed with, and couldn’t bring myself to overlook. I just had to tell Tim about it, and to share my thoughts with his readers!

This is how the post you’re reading was born…

So what’s the idea?

To quote Tim:

“Successful people don’t care too much for reality; it just gets in the way and slows them down.”

This isn’t a rare opinion in personal growth literature. “Reality” doesn’t have a good reputation around here. Personal growth experts usually promote beliefs, positive affirmations, the law of attraction, taking action and a string of other facets and techniques for people to improve their lives. Reality hardly gets a mention.

But why should it? Isn’t “reality” the thing we seek to change in our lives? Isn’t our life determined by the beliefs we hold, and not the reality we live in? Don’t we create our own reality?

In this post I will present a model that shows the connection between reality and personal growth. Feel free to question the model, but I urge you to use the model to question your own thoughts about reality, and see if it can make a positive contribution to your life.

Reality and I

Human life rests on a two-step process on which everything else is built:

Understand the environment you are in
Take action based on your understanding

This is a continuous process. We are always refining our understanding, and re-adjusting our actions. We understand the world based on what we observe, experience and read (i.e. we learn from the experiences of others), and we take action accordingly. Taking action (i.e. having practical exposure to reality) gives us more data to refine our understanding of reality. And the cycle continues.

We are endowed with senses in order to gain input data about our environment, our intellect processes that data and seeks to form a comprehensive understanding about the nature of the objects we come into contact with and the nature of the world in which we live.

When we get out of bed, we don’t usually check whether there’s a floor we can put our feet on. We know it’s there, because this is what we understand about the world. We observed the floor, we formed an understanding of its nature, we formed an understanding of the nature of reality and we use this understanding to integrate more and more data to.

There are times when our observations lead us to form wrong conclusions about the nature of our environment and of human life.

When we see people suffer, we can assume that life on earth is about suffering, and that there is no alternative to it (it’s reality, right?). However, this conclusion – while based on observation – is not the whole truth. Suffering is a possibility and happiness is a possibility. And – what’s more important – we can take the right actions to lead us away from suffering and towards happiness.

While we may possess an intellect that tells us what reality is like (according to the knowledge we acquired and the mental processing we did on it), we won’t necessarily have an inclination to take the appropriate actions. That’s what emotions are there for. The intellect chooses the direction and emotions push us in that direction.

Therefore, the connection between reality, beliefs, intellect, emotions and action is:

Reality: The world we live in and our nature as human beings. This is something we are conscious of, but we do not create.

Beliefs: Our understanding of reality. Our beliefs can be based on tradition, religion, parents, society, science, philosophy, observation, etc. Our beliefs match reality to varying degrees.

Intellect: The faculty we use to understand the world in which we live and our human nature. It is used to integrate our observations and to evaluate the beliefs and ideas we are exposed to.

Emotions: The sensations we experience that push us towards action.

Action: The physical behavior we perform, based on our emotional leanings and our understanding of the world.

All human problems stem from conflicts or inconsistencies between these elements: when our beliefs don’t match reality, we are using a map that doesn’t accurately reflect the terrain. We could be banging our heads against a dead-end when our map says we’re on a highway.

If our beliefs don’t match our intellectual conclusions (a common phenomena amongst the followers of organized religions), we can experience confusion and begin to pursue conflicting goals. Our emotions can lead us to pursue goals that conflict with our own survival interests. People don’t usually eat junk food because they hate it. They eat it because they LOVE it!

But is that good for our well-being? Shouldn’t we develop different emotional associations to food that will have us craving healthy, nutritious food and distancing ourselves from unhealthy, heart-attack-inducing junk?

Personal growth is our volitional effort to develop the beliefs that most closely match reality, aligning our emotions to our well-being and having the skills to carry out the actions that best serve our lives.

When we ignore reality, we do not have a foundation on which to base our beliefs, and we will experience a lot of frustration trying to re-draw a map without considering what the terrain is like! If we wish to accelerate our personal growth efforts, we need to accept the foundation on which it is built. And in the timeless words of Francis Bacon:

“Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed.”

If we seek to shape our lives for the better, we must know what we are capable of as human beings and what will bring us the greatest results, based on the world in which we exist...

If you’re interested in the ideas Haider has presented here, you can head over to his blog and subscribe to his RSS feed or for email updates.

He’s currently writing an e-book that goes through this model in greater detail to expose the main problems we are experiencing in personal growth.

If you’ve been reading up on self development and personal growth for many years without experiencing the results you are seeking, then you may well appreciate the e-book. Alternatively, you could just hire a good life coach ;-)

NOTE: I finally got the go ahead to say who I’m co-authoring the new book with. It’s John Strelecky a good friend and an excellent author. His books have been translated into 18 different languages (I’m still waiting for mine to be translated into English), so he knows a little bit about writing. ‘The Big 5 For Life’ is one of my favorite all time business books and if you want to be a great leader I’d urge you to check it put. Just in case you were wondering, that is not an affiliate link and I got friendly with John AFTER I’d read some of his material, so there’s no bias!

The book is rather modestly called “How To Be Rich and Happy’ and it’ll blow your socks off, honest! More to follow.

Enjoyed this post? Please share it!

Digg it | Stumble it |

Email this post to a friend

32 Comments So Far.

Comment by Grace on 16 April 2009:

Well, I was right there with you through the part about the disconnects between reality and beliefs.

But I kinda fell off the train when you said, “Personal growth is our volitional effort to develop the beliefs that most closely match reality…”

What if we could just do away with the beliefs part? What about meeting reality directly, allowing everything to be as it is?

I’m not talking about the beliefs such as, my feet will meet the floor when I get out of bed in the morning. I’m talking about the beliefs that, as you point out, cause pain and suffering – the beliefs that are in disagreement with reality. You know, the ones that say “that shouldn’t have happened.”

Y’know?
Comment by Wormy on 16 April 2009:

Interestingly, these are some ideas I’ve been playing around with recently.

1. Reality is what is is, there are no right or wrongs about it.
2. That our beliefs shape our experience of reality. Change those, change your perception but you don’t get to change reality.

Just how you deal with it.

Wormys last blog post..Exploring Love Part 1
Comment by Haider on 16 April 2009:

First of all, Tim, thank you for this opportunity to write on your blog and for your lovely introduction! :D

@Grace: Reality is what it is, regardless of human awareness. But as humans, we are limited by our knowledge and our reasoning is fallible. We can make mistakes connecting facts together. Therefore, it’s impossible to escape our beliefs, unless we are omniscient, which we are not.

We need to develop a wider, more comprehensive understanding of reality. That’s why we have belief systems. Beliefs that are in disagreement with reality should be abandoned immediately and replaced with a more accurate belief. If we choose to cling on to faulty beliefs, then we will suffer the consequences.

False beliefs should be abandoned, but forming beliefs can’t be abandoned, simply because we’re fallible humans.

@Wormy: While there are no rights and wrongs in reality (because it’s neutral), the concepts of right and wrong are essential to human survival. You need the guidance of right and wrong to determine what to do and what to avoid.

You can believe that eating junk food is good for you (i.e. it’s the right thing for you to do), but this belief won’t change the fact that you are causing damage to yourself and your life. This brings us back to the importance of reality, and adjusting our beliefs (and, therefore, our understanding of right and wrong) to match it.

I hope that makes sense, and thank you both for your comments! :D

Haiders last blog post..Short Film: What Is That?
Comment by Hilary on 16 April 2009:

Haider, I think this model has a lot of value and provides a lot of clarity, but it is full of your beliefs that I don’t subscribe to such as:

‘You can believe that eating junk food is good for you but this belief won’t change the fact that you are causing damage to yourself and your life.’ and

‘Reality is what it is, regardless of human awareness.’

What about that old tree falling in the forest and making no sound? And more to the point, what about Einstein and relativity and all that – the idea that you cannot observe a phenomenon without affecting its behaviour? What about psychosomatic illness?

You believe that reality is external and immutable while I believe that it is intimately connected with us and our beliefs about it. So I’m wondering if this model could be extricated from the beliefs inherent in it so that it could be useful to anyone, no matter their reality platform.

Hilarys last blog post..My parallel universe
Comment by Haider on 17 April 2009:

@Hilary: Beliefs are our interpretation of reality and its nature. We can observe the same phenomena but understand it differently, given our beliefs.

To address each point you raised:

* Falling Tree: According to Wikipedia: “Sound is vibration transmitted through a solid, liquid, or gas, composed of frequencies within the range of hearing and of a level sufficiently strong to be heard, or the sensation stimulated in organs of hearing by such vibrations.”

Therefore, the vibration occurs without the need for a human consciousness. But if there is no ear to respond to and be stimulated by the vibration, then it’s not sound, by definition.

It’s like saying: If somebody speaks but no one is there to listen to him, is he really speaking? Of course he’s speaking. Whether people are around him or not doesn’t change that fact.

* Relativity: The theory of relativity doesn’t actually state that there is no objective reality. Some scientists or laymen may reach that conclusion, based on their beliefs. But it’s not evidence in support of their beliefs.

Relativity simply takes context into consideration. “Observers” don’t change reality based on their observation, but they exist in different contexts where measurements differ. Gravity on earth isn’t the same as gravity on the moon. That doesn’t change whether people are on the moon or not.

* Psychosomatic illness: Human beings can have a strong influence on their bodily functions, but this doesn’t mean that the world and reality are subjective. The fact that the body is operated by the mind is objective fact. If somebody suffers from a trauma he can become paralyzed, even though his limbs are perfectly healthy. That simply goes to show the connection between one’s mind and his body. It doesn’t conflict with the idea of objective reality.

I’ll go through the argument for objective reality and the consequences of believing in a subjective reality in greater detail in my e-book.. So stay tuned!

Thank you for contributing to the discussion! :D

Haiders last blog post..Short Film: What Is That?
Comment by Maureen on 17 April 2009:

I think what is confusing is that when you talk about Reality you mean the physical laws that govern the way our world works ie gravity, oxygen we breath, quantum physics etc. What other people might think you mean is your environment. ie. yes there is a floor there but I might have a rug on it or there might be a dog laying beside my bed. So I might need to be aware of that AND I can control that.
Sound is governed by the physical laws of our world. Hence yes sound exists whether there is someone there to hear it or not but I can control my environment by putting myself in a sound proof room and not even hear what the person says.
Maybe people need a distinction between reality and environment in your model.
Is this what you mean by reality?
Comment by Tim Brownson on 17 April 2009:

You know, I should just give up trying to predict people’s comments because I am utterly crap at it!

Thanks to Haider for a stimulating read and I’m wondering whether my opinion on Reality is redundant in terms of the fact that I have given it so many times.

Like Maureen though, I think it depends on how you look at the word.

Of course there are certain realities that we all accept as per the floor reference, but there are also large areas where people have differing views according to their own version of reality.

@ Haider The explanation of sound doesn’t make any sense to me. What if there had been a recording device left there? Then somebody had listened to that at a later date. They would have heard sound even though they weren’t there at the time.

Also I’m just reading a book on Einstein and at the beginning when asked to give a short summary of relativity he answered that it would take him 3 days to do so. The writer went on to say “Unless the questioner also had an intimate acquaintance with Mathematics and Physics the definition would be incomprehensible.”

So I’m not going to pretend I understand relativity ;-)

I’m going to give this some thought. I think we’re wrapped up in semantics to a certain extent because people do see things differently and who is to say what is the correct version? We can only define that by what we our selves see.
Comment by Haider on 17 April 2009:

@Maureen: I wanted to deal with changing your environment at greater length, but didn’t want to take the focus away from the point of accepting that the nature of reality is fixed. But I think the Francis Bacon quote combines the two ideas quite eloquently.

Nature has fixed laws, and we need to respect those in order to change our environment and to make use of nature. The Wright brothers didn’t build an airplane by simply believing in the possibility. They had to design a vehicle with the right properties – given the nature of air, motion and other physical phenomena – in order to make that vehicle fly. They had to go through several models and, with each model, they *believed* that it would fly. Reality proved them wrong, so they had to learn more about reality in order to adjust their models.

With each attempt they adjusted their beliefs of what would and wouldn’t work, and as their beliefs matched reality, their final model was able to fly.

In the field of personal growth, it’s not the nature of physical laws that we need to account for (although they are extremely important in life!). What we need to account for are the laws of *human* nature, happiness, success, etc. The common trend in personal growth today is: “If you believe it to be true, then it is true.”

This is only applicable to your abilities and to some degree. If you don’t think you can run a marathon, you never will (even though you can achieve the physical strength to run one).

Focusing on beliefs instead of reality means that you don’t seek to learn more about reality in order to adjust your beliefs, but try to boost your motivation to somehow get your beliefs to work for you. It’s like the Wright brothers picking up the pieces of their wrecked model, rebuilding it in the same way and saying to each other: “This time we have to believe it will REALLY fly!”

@Tim: Since you’re an NLP dude, I will use some of your lingo ;)

Modeling is based on the premise that if others can do it, then so can you. All you need to do is learn how they did it (how they thought about it, what submodalities they used, etc) and imitate them. This can only work if we have a shared human nature and exist in a shared (objective) reality. Otherwise we can say: Just because it worked in your reality doesn’t mean it’ll work in mine.

People have unique life experiences, but that doesn’t change the essence of human nature. I might have developed a negative association to school while you developed a positive one. We still share the common trait of developing associations.

When we talk in the language of “different realities” and “your reality is not the same as mine” we rob each other of the opportunity to learn from one another’s experiences and to apply what we learn in our own lives.

Haiders last blog post..Short Film: What Is That?
Comment by christy on 17 April 2009:

Tim, I’m grateful for your comment, because I’m feeling very frustrated by Haider’s post. I also greatly appreciate your contextual comments before it.

Haider, with all due respect your post feels like a pseudo-philosophical attempt to shoehorn your personal world-view (i.e. beliefs) into a general reality structure.

As you correctly pointed out in comments, one would need to be omniscient (and omnipresent actually, presuming that the current thinking on space-time is correct) to know that there is such a thing as an “objective reality.” Neither you nor I are such a being, so it is (and always will be) speculation that such a thing as an “objective reality” exists.

The entire universe is based upon perception. Five individuals can witness the exact same event at the same time and have five distinct understandings of that event. This is not about their beliefs (though those can influence interpretation of the event; though not the facts of the event themselves). This is about the fact that each of us experiences and understands reality separately and individually. This is why “eye witness” testimony is so incredibly unreliable.

While Einstein may not have elucidated specifically on the matter of objective reality, it is most certainly implied in his writings on relativity.

Reality is relative. Unless or until someone becomes omniscient and lets us know otherwise. Even then, our experience will always be relative and contextualized.

christys last blog post..Communication as Manipulation
Comment by Tim Brownson on 17 April 2009:

@ Haider – LMAO! How were you to know you were addressing an ‘NLP Guy’ that doesn’t ‘believe’ in modeling.

What I mean by that is, it simply doesn’t work as many people describe it. The theory is very cool and people can get close results as per Bandler and Grinder did and David Gordon does, but they can’t get exact results. They mimic, they don’t replicate.

In all the NLP trainings I’ve attended and videos I’ve seen, nobody has ever managed to replicate something exactly. That’s because imo it’s not possible to do so.

If it were, why not model Tiger Woods? He’s a biggish, ripped guy, but he’s no super-athlete. The reason is there are too many intangibles, too many realities that only apply to Tiger. How do you model the ability to think and focus? At the moment we can’t.

Even if you covered the globe with weather sensors 1 feet apart, you still couldn’t accurately predict the weather. Simply because you don’t know what’s happening in between them, you’re still missing 99% of the picture. Maybe you could model 90% of Tigers swing, but you couldn’t model it all.

If you were viewing the world through a red filter and I showed you blue you’d swear it were red. No matter what I did to convince you, you’d still see red.

You see reality through your filters. They will seem 100% reasonable and logical to you because it’s impossible for you to think otherwise. Same goes for me and everybody else on the planet. We all see what we are conditioned to see.

I’m not saying that can’t change, of course it can. But we only change one filter for another, we never get to see the real world. We can’t remove all our filters. We delete, we distort and we generalize.

Unless that is you adopt the Buddhist view of reality which is way different than yours. I like that theory (even though I don’t fully understand it!), but then again I like it because it fits with my filters and it may not fit with yours.

@ Christy – Don’t feel frustrated, this is fun ;-)
Comment by christy on 17 April 2009:

@Tim, don’t misunderstand. I think that frustration is the best starting place for healthy debate. :)

It’s been years since I did formal debate, but I still love it!

christys last blog post..Communication as Manipulation
Comment by Positively Present on 17 April 2009:

Such an interesting post and topic to ponder. The question “does the truth even matter?” is a great one, but I think the answer really depends on the situation. In most cases, I’ve found that honesty really IS the best policy, but, then again, sometimes the old adage “what you don’t know can’t hurt you” is true too… Truth is a tricky subject, but a very interesting and important one to talk about. Thanks for the insights here!

http://positivelypresent.typepad.com

Positively Presents last blog post..don’t settle for anything less than butterflies
Comment by Vlad Dolezal on 17 April 2009:

I have to second the recommendation for “The Big 5 For Life”. It’s incredibly fun to read, even by self-help standards, and yet contains damn deep and useful ideas.

I just had to say that, although I doubt many people will read this far down in the comments :)

So, congrats on landing a book deal with that guy, Tim! Nothing but pure excellence can come from that!

Vlad Dolezals last blog post..Creating Money out of Thin Air
Comment by Haider on 17 April 2009:

@christy: Before I address the points you raised, I would like to point out that I don’t mean to force my beliefs down your throat or to impose my worldview on you. Whatever I’ve presented is for your consideration, which you can either agree with or disagree with.

I’m actually glad that you feel frustrated, because it means:

1) You feel strongly about the subject and consider it important

2) You disagree with me, which can be a fruitful opportunity for growth (for me too, because you are helping me refine the way I’m presenting my ideas so I can better address the points we disagree on)

What I find interesting about the points you raised is that:

- You assert them as though they are fact (even though you condemned me for doing that)

- They are based on the acceptance of an objective reality

How did you come to the conclusion that I “correctly” pointed out something, if you have no way of making such an assertion and if you believe that reality is subjective? You should have said: “In my world, it is correct that…”

Why do you present the statement “The entire universe is based upon perception” as fact and not as your own opinion?

The example of five witnesses to an event doesn’t refute objective reality, but asserts it! The point I’m making is that the event occurred regardless of whether there are eye witnesses or not. Whether eye-witness accounts are reliable or not is another matter, but it doesn’t prove that reality is subjective or based on perception. That’s the difference between reality and beliefs.

You seem to take the ideas that reality is subjective and that it is impossible for human beings to understand reality as facts, without being willing to reconsider these ideas.

@Tim: Modeling is a term you used in your ebook and you proposed your readers give it a try, so it would be safe to believe that you’re an NLP dude who believes in it. :D

I believe in the importance of modeling, but I don’t think you can model *everything* in another person’s approach, as you pointed out.

This doesn’t contradict the fact that there remains a shared reality we all live in.

We can never fully escape our filters, but it doesn’t mean that our filters are completely distorting reality. All human accomplishments have rested on the acceptance of natural laws and acting according to them.

Haiders last blog post..Short Film: What Is That?
Comment by Tim Brownson on 17 April 2009:

@ Christy _ I know, I was only messin’ with ya!

@ Vlad – Glad you liked B5FL and thanks for the positive feedback. I hope we can live up to your expectations.

@ Haider – Oh man that was naughty! I used believe in apostrophes and then said it doesn’t work as some people suggest is does. I also said it is a form of mimicry and that is exactly what I was meaning in my book. To explain the process of modeling as it’s meant in NLP terminology would have taken a whole e-book.

If you can’t escape your filters, who on earth can you say with complete certainty they aren’t distorting your reality. IMHO, it’s a complete contradiction in terms.
Comment by Lori on 17 April 2009:

In reading this post and the comments, I can’t help wondering why it needs to be so complicated. Truthfully I’m not entirely sure what the debate is here. I think we’re all talking about whether reality is or is subjective…but then I wonder what does it matter?

I’ve found everything is easier when I keep it simple. Why over-intellectualize and get bogged down in details? If you want to change the world you know, do something differently. And keep doing it. Isn’t it really that simple?

Loris last blog post..Street Performers from Around the World Sing Stand by Me
Comment by Lori on 17 April 2009:

I am late for yoga and yet I feel the need to add to my comment. Damn you Tim and your addictive Daring Adventure!!

I realize life isn’t as simple as I’ve implied. I also know you need to change your thoughts to change your actions. I just wonder if sometimes when we intellectualize so much we hinder ourselves from taking action. I’ve been an over-analyzer for most of my life, so FOR ME, keeping it simple is invaluable. It allows me to be far more effective than I would be otherwise.

Maybe this just comes back to the whole subjective reality idea. If over-thinking helps your life instead of hindering it, like mine, than by all means do what makes sense for you.

OK. Done. Yoga now.

Loris last blog post..Street Performers from Around the World Sing Stand by Me
Comment by Lisa Illichmann on 20 April 2009:

Thanks for this post, it was interesting to read. Reality is always only an interpretation and therefore never a constant given, or a blanket truth. We each have our own based on our experiences and expectations and the meaningswe derive out of them.
So does the truth and therefore reality matter? Certainly, to each his own.
Lisa

Lisa Illichmanns last blog post..Tough Times
Pingback by TFTD « Never Too Late on 20 April 2009:

[...] hat tip [...]
Comment by David Cain on 20 April 2009:

Haider,

I liked this post, particularly this part:

All human problems stem from conflicts or inconsistencies between these elements: when our beliefs don’t match reality, we are using a map that doesn’t accurately reflect the terrain.

For me, the most important thing to remember about aligning those elements is honesty. It can be tempting to deny certain parts of my reality if they don’t make me feel good to think about (e.g. my bank balance, my bad habits) and it always leads to trouble.

David Cains last blog post..There is No Good and Evil, Just Smart and Dumb (Part 2 of 2)
Comment by Haider on 22 April 2009:

@Tim: The concept of “filters” is a fairly abstract one. We need to understand how it relates to real-life in order to resolve the contradiction between:

* We have filters

* We can know reality for what it is

Although there are philosophers who cast doubt on human senses, people don’t usually question whether they are sitting in front of a computer reading this or not. They don’t question whether there’s a floor under their feet or not. Physical reality is taken for granted as fact (and if it isn’t, people certainly behave as though it’s a given, even if they choose not to admit it).

The problem arises when we discuss abstractions. God’s existence, concepts of right and wrong, religion, patriotism, justice, etc. People have very different beliefs when it comes to these issues.

A “filter” is *how* we think about these subjects and *what* we think about them. But we can adjust our filters based on the physical evidence we see around us or discovering contradictions in our own thinking or through several other means.

To give you the simplest example of you can discover a flaw in your filter and readjust it to match reality:

If you believe that swans are white and can never be black, you approach reality dismissing such a possibility. But if you see a black swan, you will certainly change your filter (belief) to match the reality you’ve witnessed.

People have abandoned patriotic loyalties (filters) after traveling to a different country or witnessing atrocities committed in the name of such loyalties.

Just because you have beliefs (filters) doesn’t mean you’re not open to change them. That just depends on the choice you make.

Haiders last blog post..Short Film: What Is That?
Comment by Haider on 22 April 2009:

@Lori: You raise some very interesting points. Thank you for your contributions :)

Over-intellectualizing/analyzing is a very serious and common problem. But it’s important for us to pursue *simple* solutions and not *simplistic* ones. Simple solutions go for the minimum amount of detail needed. Simplistic ones go for below the amount needed.

For example, psychological problems can have some very complex roots. It’s important to go to the right depth to unearth them. Telling someone who feels lonely or unloved to: “Love yourself” or “Smile all the time” or “Be positive” is too simplistic. More is needed to get to the heart of the problem.

Believing in an objective or a subjective reality will have ramifications on the rest of your life. To demonstrate this, I will use the example of over-intellectualizing! :)

When you accept that the world is objective, it has fixed laws and you need to act accordingly, you have a standard by which to judge whether what you are doing is life-affirming or life-destroying. Knowledge is never-ending. You can always acquire more of it. But if you say:

“Knowledge is only useful to me to the extent I can apply it into my life”

You will limit yourself to a portion of knowledge, then move on to apply it in your life (like I mention in the article itself). However, if you don’t acknowledge an objective reality (a standard to judge what is useful knowledge and what isn’t, and how much knowledge we need in life and what to do with it), we can pursue knowledge for the sake of knowledge, without knowing how to apply it in the real world.

Accepting an objective reality is a huge paradigm shift for many. In fact, they are grappling to understand what it means in the first place! But if we overlook the fixed laws of nature (the external and the internal), we can experience frustration and confusion without really knowing why or where to begin looking for an answer.

We can blame ourselves for thinking in the wrong way or not having the right attitude, when the real problem is that we lack the understanding to know how to act appropriately in the situations we are in.

Haiders last blog post..Short Film: What Is That?
Comment by Lori on 22 April 2009:

Hi Haider~

I realized immediately after I posted my comment that I didn’t really agree with my initial response. Creating lasting change isn’t quite as simple as doing something differently. I have lots of experience doing the dirty work of therapy, so I understand the importance of exploring complex roots.

That being said (and with all due respect) I still find this post a little confusing. Even your last comment leaves me scratching my head a tad. I don’t see how the example relates to over-intellectualizing. (I think you’re equating learning and over-analyzing…which I believe are two different things.)

I can say this much: my entire belief system (and blog) depends on the idea reality is all about perception. This is my conclusion based on my experiences and it empowers me. However, I’d love to understand your theory better to either reaffirm or evolve mine. Perhaps I’ll have to buy the book!

Lori

Loris last blog post..10 Reasons It’s Awesome People Don’t Like You
Comment by Haider on 22 April 2009:

@Lori: I have a tendency to write in a very technical way, so apologies for not making my ideas clear. This is yet another attempt to explain the core message of my post:

* Our *life* is based on our perceptions. If we believe we can’t run a marathon, we won’t be able to run one. Not because we lack the physical strength to do so, but because we exclude the possibility from our lives. Therefore, we don’t even bother trying.

* Perception (and beliefs) shape the life we lead. How we see ourselves, the people around us and the world we live in determines the kind of emotions we experience and the decisions we make.

* We live in a world with fixed laws and, as human beings, we have a particular nature. There’s a lot of room in which we can make decisions, but there are things we simply cannot change about our nature.

* To experience the greatest joy and success, we need to adjust our beliefs so that they can match reality. This is done by embracing natural laws and working according to them. Rather than getting frustrated with ourselves for needing sleep and rest, we accept this about ourselves and actually sleep and rest.

* Our beliefs are not reality, but our understanding of reality. Just because someone believes that a race is inferior to another or that it is acceptable to murder others doesn’t make these things true or right. They will determine how the person behaves and lead his life, but they are not reality.

* By accepting that our beliefs don’t always match reality, we approach life with the desire to develop understanding rather than blame ourselves for not creating the reality we want. In the same way that the Wright brothers sought to understand physical laws in order to build a flying vehicle, we need to understand ourselves in order to be successful.

* If we say: “We create our reality,” we will experience frustration whenever we don’t get the results we want. We may think that we lack motivation, when the problem is that we simply lack knowledge. Building a house isn’t simply based on enthusiasm and the belief you can build a house. It needs knowledge about how houses are to be constructed and gathering the right tools for the job.

* By accepting that there is a reality that is separate from our thinking and our perceptions (e.g. gravity doesn’t exist because we want it to exist), we will acknowledge the importance of gaining knowledge and adjusting our thinking accordingly.

I hope it makes sense now and thank you very much for pointing out the fact that my writing isn’t the easiest to understand! ;)

Haiders last blog post..Short Film: What Is That?
Comment by Lori on 22 April 2009:

OK NOW I get it. Thank you! This is actually something I already believe…I just didn’t realize what you were saying. On the one hand, I think you can choose to see good or bad in the world because they are both there. Focusing on the positive can be quite empowering. HOWEVER, when deciding what action to take, it’s important to consider all angles. If you make your plan of attack based solely on the positives, your fail to plan for the challenges. I think this aligns with your POV. Thank you so much for clarifying…it bugged me I just wasn’t getting it.

Loris last blog post..10 Reasons It’s Awesome People Don’t Like You
Comment by Haider on 22 April 2009:

@Lori: Phew!! It bugged me that I couldn’t explain myself! :P

I think personal growth literature now focuses too much on positive thinking and how to induce positive emotions, without really showing how these relate to our lives.

I wrote about this on my blog:

http://personalgrowthmap.com/2009/03/30/negative-emotions-are-healthy/

Haiders last blog post..Short Film: What Is That?
Comment by Lori on 22 April 2009:

I completely agree. While we’re sharing I wrote something similar!

http://seeinggood.com/its-awesome-you-feel-bad-create-sustainable-optimism/

Loris last blog post..10 Reasons It’s Awesome People Don’t Like You
Comment by Ricky Buchanan on 20 May 2009:

OK, I realise I’m a month late to this post but I found the general concept to be hugely useful. I don’t agree with everything in the post, but the general concept that “ignore reality” is over-simplistic because reality does influence us a lot is one I very much agree with.

In my particular situation I’m severely disabled and bedridden. I only have a small amount of mental/emotional energy each day and so even on the computer where my physical limitations are less significant I have to triage my life down to what’s most important and only do that. This IS reality, so no matter how much I try to ignore it, motivate myself, be positive, or whatever, it still influences what I can achieve.

The way I see this personally, in terms of a Venn diagram, is that what we could possibly do in reality is a large circle and what we believe we can do is a smaller circle inside the large one – what we actually do is an even smaller circle that’s usually inside the second one. Enlarging the two smaller circles is a worthwhile and useful and positive goal of life coaching, but trying to make somebody believe that the larger circle (what’s actually possible) is infinitely large is ultimately counter-productive because it’s not true and eventually the person will realise that.

I hope that made sense – it would be much easier if I could draw a picture for you!

Cheers,
Ricky

Ricky Buchanans last blog post..Using A Desktop Computer In Bed
Comment by Haider on 20 May 2009:

Dear Ricky,

Thank you for your input. It’s never too late to appreciate a sound opinion. :)

Your model is crystal clear. However, I would say that the second circle (our beliefs) can extend beyond the first circle (reality) as well. We can either hold on to limited beliefs (and shrink our 2nd circle), or we can hold on to wishful thinking and enlarge that circle beyond our realistic limitations. I wrote this article to address the latter problem.

I’d be interested to know what you disagreed with in the article. :D

Thanks again for your contribution!

Haider

Haiders last blog post..Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway
Comment by Ricky Buchanan on 20 May 2009:

Thanks for the quick reply!

I hadn’t thought about wishful thinking but yes, it fits the model in terms of the things you can do being bigger (in some areas, anyway) than reality. I’m guilty of that sometimes!

What did I disagree with, primarily this section:

All human problems stem from conflicts or inconsistencies between these elements: when our beliefs don’t match reality, we are using a map that doesn’t accurately reflect the terrain. We could be banging our heads against a dead-end when our map says we’re on a highway.

“All human problems” is a huge generalisation – I believe a lot of problems do indeed stem from our beliefs not matching reality, primarily (as you said above) when we hold self-limiting beliefs that have no basis in reality. But sometimes it’s not that your map is wrong, it’s just that the terrain sucks!

I spend a fair bit of time on “self” work and on dealing with my physical limitations and making the most of what I have and being happy with it, but basically being bedridden SUCKS! The medical problems suck! The fact it takes me more than a month to recover from a 4 day hospital stay sucks! The part where I don’t have a firm diagnosis sucks! The diagnosis it looks like I’ll get would mean that I have a very limited possibility of improving physicallly, this sucks! This suckage isn’t because my map of the terrain (my beliefs) is wrong – it’s just because the terrain (reality) is really not nice.

Like I said, I usually deal with this well and work hard to make sure that I get as much out of life as possible. I try very hard not to get caught up in how much reality limits me, but that doesn’t stop it limiting me – it just stops me from limiting myself further by spending energy bemoaning my fate. If I curled up under the covers and refused to come out because I couldn’t walk or couldn’t go outside or whatever, that would be stupid. But I think that denying that these severe health problems make reality suck is just as stupid.

What sayeth you?

Cheers,
Ricky

Ricky Buchanans last blog post..No Pity
Comment by Haider on 20 May 2009:

@Ricky: Your reply was quicker than mine! ;)

First of all, the inconsistencies I spoke of weren’t simply between reality and beliefs, but between any of the elements that make up our lives: reality, beliefs, intellect, emotions and actions.

We must begin by accepting reality for what it is. We have a limited scope to change it (i.e. “command” reality so that it can serve us better, such as building planes, fire, etc.) but we cannot change natural laws, including our nature as human beings. This means that we must accept our own human limitations.

Frustration arises when we want reality to be different to what it is, but this is a losing battle we cannot fight for long.

All human beings have limits. We cannot control the weather or prevent the roof from falling on our heads. This is where our ability to take action might not always match the demands reality places on us (i.e. there’s an inconsistency between reality and action). We are not omnipotent, which explains why life can be a struggle.

I appreciate that you are experiencing challenges the majority of people aren’t facing. I personally don’t like to give advice or suggestions to people whose struggles I haven’t personally experienced, but I offer this idea for your consideration:

Our happiness in life is largely dependent on what we choose to focus on. I have many limitations that I choose to ignore because thinking about them will make my life a bit sucky. Since they are things I cannot change (or maybe cannot currently change) I need to focus on what I can change and what I can achieve. The feeling of competence is a self-esteem booster, so rather than think of what I’m not good at I can think about what I am good at and to appreciate my strengths rather than be upset about my weaknesses.

Haiders last blog post..Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway
Comment by Ricky Buchanan on 21 May 2009:

@Haider: Only quick because you caught me with some energy.

I pretty much agree with everything you said in that last reply actually! And also, as I said above I spend a lot of time focussing on the good parts of my life and on what I can achieve. And I achieve lots of stuff – you can see at Not Done Living links to most of the things I do online, and I also do local advocacy for others with disabilities who aren’t as articulate (or as willing to be the squeaky wheel) as I am.

I did write about it in my last comment but I don’t usually think so much about things I’d rather be different, except when something changes or progresses and then I have to grieve for whatever new losses I have before I can be more accepting again.

I don’t know your blog personally (although I’m going to look after I write this!), so this may be redundant but what you’re saying sounds very Buddhist. I’m not Buddhist myself but I meditate almost every day as it’s one of the few things I can almost always do! I’d like to find a meditation teacher who’ll come to my house as I can’t go to regular meetings/classes but it’s proving a challenge.

Thanks for interacting with me like this, it’s been really interesting. Off to investigaet your blog now!

Cheers,
r

Ricky Buchanans last blog post..No Pity City – Now In Australia and Canada Too!