Re: Re: Confidence Gap and Myths

[Guest guest]

Thanks! Stan!a month or two ago I was reading How to Think Straight about Psychology by E. Stanovich.  Sounds very similar to this book.  I got about 1/2 way through and had to return to library.  It was good though and it had lots of myth busting parts.  And in philosophy is was pro-Karl Popper and anti-Wittgenstein.  That i like because I don't like Wittgenstein and Popper is my favorite philosophy.

Thanks again, I definitely will check this book out after Monday.

 

(and everyone else),

A very interesting and informative book is '50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology' (http://tinyurl.com/79n8dlv). It's written by a team of four psychologists and is highly evidence-based.

They also include a 'myth-busting' kit to help us distinguish science from pseudoscience. There's a lot of rubbish about psychology in the media and self-help books, and we need all the help we can get when it comes to working out what's true and what's not.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi everyone,

>

> I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class

> and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and

> study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think

> about a lot of things.

>

> Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein

> getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths

> about confidence and self-esteem.

>

> I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two.

>

> 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See

> Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is

> one of my favorite all time books.

>

> 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control

> over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where

> you say to yourself " I can't raise my arms " while raising your arms.

>

> These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and

> theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in

> that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that

> positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ( " I'm good

> enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me " )

>

> I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational

> statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form

> of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to

> overgeneralize. Like, " I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.) " or

> " I am a husband " . He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or

> husband etc. Or " I am a loser " or " you are a loser " or " he is a

> winner " . He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of

> the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he

> went to extremes on this.

>

> Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of

> writing " She is depressed " he writes the much more awkward statement, " She

> depresses herself "

>

> On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it

> crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that

> we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override

> our nutty nature.

>

> Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we

> step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something

> that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and

> the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT

> does not deny the existence of human nature.

>

> So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out

> you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday.

>

> Cheers!

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Kate, this reviewer is nuts! He defends Freud! Freud was nuts! He wrote fiction and didn't do science. See Karl Popper's writings.Sent from my iPhone

Thanks for the link Stan. I checked it out and obviously not having read it can't assess its veracity (and not even then, not being an expert) But I was interested to read this review:http://www.amazon.com/Great-Myths-Popular-Psychology-Misconceptions/product-reviews/140513111X/ref=cm_cr_dp_synop?ie=UTF8 & showViewpoints=0 & sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending#R38TAN4A6J3WYV

which raises some valid sounding criticisms. Seems like it would be worth bearing in mind that the authors, like any humans, have their own biases which inevitably influence the arguments they present, and that any book can't claim to be presenting the "Truth" no matter how much it supposedly relies on evidence based research. I certainly don't think it would be wise to see it as the "Last Word" on Life, the Universe and Everything.

Cheers

Kate

> >

> > Hi everyone,

> >

> > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class

> > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and

> > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think

> > about a lot of things.

> >

> > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein

> > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths

> > about confidence and self-esteem.

> >

> > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two.

> >

> > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See

> > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is

> > one of my favorite all time books.

> >

> > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control

> > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where

> > you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms.

> >

> > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and

> > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in

> > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that

> > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good

> > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me")

> >

> > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational

> > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form

> > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to

> > overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or

> > "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or

> > husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a

> > winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of

> > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he

> > went to extremes on this.

> >

> > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of

> > writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She

> > depresses herself"

> >

> > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it

> > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that

> > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override

> > our nutty nature.

> >

> > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we

> > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something

> > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and

> > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT

> > does not deny the existence of human nature.

> >

> > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out

> > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday.

> >

> > Cheers!

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Kate, maybe so. I'm gonna get this book and read still. Then decide if this criticism is valid.Sent from my iPhone

, I think the context and the details of his "defence" of Freud here is relevant. It's not like the reviewer is claiming everything Freud did was wonderful, far from it.

Not withstanding that, it still seems to me that he has some valid criticisms of the book. He points out that some of their examples of "myths" are over simplified or taken out of context. Also, it's good that they back up their arguments with evidence, but only looking at the evidence that supports your argument isn't very scientific IMO.

Kate

> > > >

> > > > Hi everyone,

> > > >

> > > > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class

> > > > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and

> > > > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think

> > > > about a lot of things.

> > > >

> > > > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein

> > > > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths

> > > > about confidence and self-esteem.

> > > >

> > > > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two.

> > > >

> > > > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See

> > > > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is

> > > > one of my favorite all time books.

> > > >

> > > > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control

> > > > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where

> > > > you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms.

> > > >

> > > > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and

> > > > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in

> > > > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that

> > > > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good

> > > > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me")

> > > >

> > > > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational

> > > > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form

> > > > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to

> > > > overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or

> > > > "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or

> > > > husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a

> > > > winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of

> > > > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he

> > > > went to extremes on this.

> > > >

> > > > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of

> > > > writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She

> > > > depresses herself"

> > > >

> > > > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it

> > > > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that

> > > > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override

> > > > our nutty nature.

> > > >

> > > > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we

> > > > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something

> > > > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and

> > > > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT

> > > > does not deny the existence of human nature.

> > > >

> > > > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out

> > > > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday.

> > > >

> > > > Cheers!

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

"You live with it until you die. In the meantime, you use whatever blunts the pain to get a few moments of relief."

Detlef, I am living proof that this is not necessarily the truth - at least, it is not my truth, and I would bet it doesn't have to be yours. I am older than you are, and it took me until this year to realize that blunting the pain for a few moments of relief is not something I need to be resigned to or continue doing. It ain't easy, but it is pretty simple when it comes right down to it: Stop doing the things that don't support your values and start doing the things that do.

I ultimately realized I had two choices: 1) buy into your statement above and continue to suffer; or 2) make room for the pain in all its rawness and ugliness without relying on blunting mechanisms. It was a gradual process for me, building over several years since I discovered ACT - and I kept stepping forward until I got it. I'm pretty stubborn and I rebelled like hell against giving up my lifelong crutches; but that stubbornness paid off as well, since I was determined not to give up on ACT until I got some traction with it.

Everyone's pain is different and unique to them, and I'm not saying mine is worse or harder to deal with than yours or anyone elses. The thing is, I have suffered from severe emotional pain all my life -- due to circumstances beyond my control when I was a child - but I now have the power to make life-sustaining and -building choices for myself. I finally realized that blunting the pain, although it seemed harmless enough (I wasn't "over the top" with any of my habits), was getting in the way of progress toward my values.

I don't mean for this to sound like a "holier than thou" lecture - not at all! And I realize that what works for me may not be a solution for you - but wanted to share my experience in case if could be helpful.

I care,

Helena

To: "ACT for the Public" <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2011 1:39:13 PMSubject: Re: Confidence Gap and Myths

I think that horrible (and horrifying) things that happen to you in your life lay down tracks in every cell of your body, and no amount of positive (or negative, or the various shades of CBT/Act, or even neutral) psychology, nor a pharmacy's worth of "antidepressants" will or can make a jot of difference to your pain.You live with it until you die. In the meantime, you use whatever blunts the pain to get a few moments of relief. For some it's substances, for others it's religion, or work, or whatever floats your boat.No one actually wants to die before "their time", but sometimes the only way to stop the incessant pain is to zero out.I'm not quite there, but have felt close more than a few times. I think I understand why others have done it.Language is important and plays a part, but for some there are tracks in the cells for which there is no language; those tracks aren't amenable to "thinking different".Arthur Janov thought he'd found the panacea for those kinds of pains decades ago. The fuckwit didn't have the intelligence to realize he'd only scratched the surface, if that. Then again, maybe he did, but decided to end all enquiry and capitalize on what he he did know: that people in great pain will pay megabucks if offered a pain-free future that doesn't depend on medication or any other exterior crutch. In some ways, I think that CBT and Act play on this wish, too.>> Hi everyone,> > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class> and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and> study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think> about a lot of things.> > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein> getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths> about confidence and self-esteem.> > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two.> > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See> Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is> one of my favorite all time books.> > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control> over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where> you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms.> > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and> theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in> that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that> positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good> enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me")> > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational> statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form> of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to> overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or> "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or> husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a> winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of> the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he> went to extremes on this.> > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of> writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She> depresses herself"> > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it> crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that> we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override> our nutty nature.> > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we> step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something> that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and> the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT> does not deny the existence of human nature.> > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out> you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday.> > Cheers!> > >

[Guest guest]

Started 50 myths. I read lots of psych - not pop psych. So I've read about most these myths. This book is for beginning psych student.Sent from my iPhone

(and everyone else),

A very interesting and informative book is '50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology' (http://tinyurl.com/79n8dlv). It's written by a team of four psychologists and is highly evidence-based.

They also include a 'myth-busting' kit to help us distinguish science from pseudoscience. There's a lot of rubbish about psychology in the media and self-help books, and we need all the help we can get when it comes to working out what's true and what's not.

Cheers,

Stan

>

> Hi everyone,

>

> I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class

> and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and

> study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think

> about a lot of things.

>

> Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein

> getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths

> about confidence and self-esteem.

>

> I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two.

>

> 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See

> Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is

> one of my favorite all time books.

>

> 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control

> over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where

> you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms.

>

> These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and

> theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in

> that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that

> positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good

> enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me")

>

> I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational

> statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form

> of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to

> overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or

> "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or

> husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a

> winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of

> the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he

> went to extremes on this.

>

> Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of

> writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She

> depresses herself"

>

> On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it

> crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that

> we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override

> our nutty nature.

>

> Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we

> step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something

> that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and

> the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT

> does not deny the existence of human nature.

>

> So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out

> you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday.

>

> Cheers!

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Detlef (and others stuck with values).Can I tell you about a little exercise I have done recently to try and articulate my values*. I want to help you to see the wood for the trees.Cut up little bits of paper, and brainstorm anything and everything that makes you feel even a little bit fulfilled, or that you believe would make you feel fulfilled if you did them. Write them down. They can be very little, in fact it works best if they are little, because you might otherwise have overlooked them. Really go to town, spend time thinking and doing it, but as soon as the thought pops into your head, write it down - don't start to question it at

this stage. Make them action-based - things that you can do.I did this, and wrote down 60-70 statements. I bet I could have come up with more. They were almost all very small silly little things, things that we could all come up with. Browsing for second-hand books. Growing my own vegatables. Watching my son whilst he is sleeping. Contributing to the ACT forum. Arguing politics with my wife (a guilty secret that one - I love winding her up!) I then went and made a cuppa, and came back to all my bits of paper.I then started to group them together into little piles. I wasn't over-thinking it, just putting them into piles that seemed to make sense in that they belonged in some way. I played around a little bit, but I was

happy with about 9 or 10 piles of 5 or 6 statements (one was a lot bigger than the others), although I also had a bundle of statements that I felt didn't really belong to any of them.Then I started looking at those piles individually. What was it that drew those things together? What is behind these little statements, these tiny little things that seem to give me a bit of fulfillment?That might be my value.The biggest pile evolved around my son (OK, I knew that, already). Another pile emerged that I hadn't even realised - they were all something to do with reading. I love reading, even absolutely shocking crappy books, in fact the mindless books are sometimes my favourite. As I said up above, I see my love of books even browsing for second-hand books. I never

really articulated that as a value before now, but it has joined the list. I'm not really sure about all the individual statements that didn't fit anywhere else, but, well, it's not perfect. But well worth a go.So, what will your piles look like? Have a go? An hour well spent in my opinion. x*this is loosely based on something I came across whilst studying, called "concept mapping" by a guy called Trochim at Cornell. From: michieux

To: ACT_for_the_Public Sent: Wednesday, 14 December 2011, 14:18 Subject: Re: Confidence Gap and Myths

Helena wrote ... 'I finally realized that blunting the pain, although it seemed harmless enough (I wasn't "over the top" with any of my habits), was getting in the way of progress toward my values. 'There's the rub, Helena -- I value almost nothing, except perhaps to remain alive, although I do very little to ensure longevity. For me it's a daily binary equation -- a kind of MAD situation -- where sooner or later the flatline on a monitor will be the victor.I realize that my posts may be inappropriate here, and so this will be my last.Regards,Detlef > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class > > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and > > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think > > about a lot of things. > > > > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein > > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths > > about confidence and self-esteem. > > > > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two. > > > > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See > > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is > > one of my favorite all time books. >

> > > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control > > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where > > you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms. > > > > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and > > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in > > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that > > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good > > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me") > > > > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational > > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form > > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb

causes us to > > overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or > > "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or > > husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a > > winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of > > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he > > went to extremes on this. > > > > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of > > writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She > > depresses herself" > > > > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it > > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that > > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a

sense override > > our nutty nature. > > > > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we > > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something > > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and > > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT > > does not deny the existence of human nature. > > > > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out > > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday. > > > > Cheers! > > > > > >>

[Guest guest]

Detlef, it sounds like you're buying into a crock of shit: I MUST be self sufficient; else, I am despicable. I mean, I get it in a way; nobody likes being dependent, but sometimes in life it is necessary. That's when we need to accept what is rather than judge ourselves for what isn't happening according to our wishes and desires in life.

Are you resigned to depising yourself? That isn't your only option, ya know. Yeah, it hurts like hell to open those cans of pain, but if you could do that without self-judgment, wouldn't that make it a more tolerable process? Can you see, at least, that there is hope to view things differently and ease some of your suffering perhaps? Or damn the suffering - let that be what it is - and just get on with your values (and I think you do have some or you wouldn't bother with this forum).

Helena

To: "ACT for the Public" <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 9:47:32 AMSubject: Re: Confidence Gap and Myths

Thank you, Helena and , for your very fine and considered responses.I get into these 'black' periods from time to time, and each one seems to last longer than the one before.It's true I do value my wife, Helena, but it's an ambivalent valuing, probably because I'm so dependent on her for most of my daily needs (and I mean everyday stuff like food and shelter). I both value her and despise my dependency, and I don't see an easy way out of that. Like many others here, I've had to be self-sufficient from a very young age, and I have great difficulty in relinquishing that. Having to do so is opening many cans of pain, and I'm having a hard time coping.Nothing new for anyone reading this, I suspect. Thinking this only makes me feel worse. I used to have such a grip, and I'm losing it.Detlef > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class > > > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and > > > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think > > > about a lot of things. > > > > > > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein > > > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths > > > about confidence and self-esteem. > > > > > > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two. > > > > > > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See > > > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is > > > one of my favorite all time books. > > > > > > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control > > > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where > > > you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms. > > > > > > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and > > > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in > > > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that > > > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good > > > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me") > > > > > > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational > > > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form > > > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to > > > overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or > > > "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or > > > husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a > > > winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of > > > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he > > > went to extremes on this. > > > > > > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of > > > writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She > > > depresses herself" > > > > > > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it > > > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that > > > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override > > > our nutty nature. > > > > > > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we > > > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something > > > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and > > > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT > > > does not deny the existence of human nature. > > > > > > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out > > > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday. > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > >>

[Guest guest]

Right, . Ad hominem arguments can be used to undermine (attack) another person's credibility and defend one's position. It was in that sense I used the word "attack" and not in the sense of a personal attack. My point was that I believe that this author's bias should be taken into consideration, as should anyone's, but should not necessarily be used to refute anyone's position in and of itself. We all have biases.

Helena

To: "ACT for the Public" <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 11:47:20 AMSubject: Re: Confidence Gap and Myths

Thank you for your response Helena. Just a minor correction to what you said:"I don't believe Kate intended her remarks to be an attack on this author but rather as a cautionary note regarding this book's claims; thus her statement would not quality as an ad hominem argument, IMO - not that you said that about Kate's remarks directly, , when you referred to the ad hominem argument."An ad hominemin argument isn't the same as a personal attack. I believe it means the irrelevant use of an opponent's characteristics to refute that opponent's claim. This site gives a better definition though:"A debater commits the Ad Hominem Fallacy when he introduces irrelevant personal premisses about his opponent. Such red herrings may successfully distract the opponent or the audience from the topic of the debate."http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.htmlGoing back to the example I presented, if I said the following or implied it, then I would commit the ad hominem argument:"we shouldn't believe that CBT is an effective treatment for Social Anxiety Disorder because the claimer is a CBT therapist." C. > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class > > > > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and > > > > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think > > > > about a lot of things. > > > > > > > > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein > > > > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths > > > > about confidence and self-esteem. > > > > > > > > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two. > > > > > > > > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See > > > > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is > > > > one of my favorite all time books. > > > > > > > > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control > > > > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where > > > > you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms. > > > > > > > > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and > > > > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in > > > > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that > > > > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good > > > > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me") > > > > > > > > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational > > > > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form > > > > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to > > > > overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or > > > > "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or > > > > husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a > > > > winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of > > > > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he > > > > went to extremes on this. > > > > > > > > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of > > > > writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She > > > > depresses herself" > > > > > > > > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it > > > > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that > > > > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override > > > > our nutty nature. > > > > > > > > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we > > > > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something > > > > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and > > > > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT > > > > does not deny the existence of human nature. > > > > > > > > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out > > > > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday. > > > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>

[Guest guest]

Note, " irrelevant personal premisses " .  I understand your point and example and you have a point.  However....I don't think Kate was using ad hominem argument and I don't think I was either when I dismissed the reviewers review due to his defense of Freud.

The reviewer that Kate quotes though, goes to great lengths to defend Freud's dream analysis.  I think this is relevant personal premiss.  Freud was nuts!  His dream analysis is nuts!  And this reviewer defending Freud and his dream analysis is nuts for defending it.  It doesn't automatically make what the reviewer says false but I don't put much weight into his review.

I bought the kindle book and started to read it.  Some of the myths I think are pretty well known myths - that is, known to be myths by many people so I think it's target audience is the young beginning college student.

Cheers!

 

Thank you for your response Helena. Just a minor correction to what you said:

" I don't believe Kate intended her remarks to be an attack on this author but rather as a cautionary note regarding this book's claims; thus her statement would not quality as an ad hominem argument, IMO - not that you said that about Kate's remarks directly, , when you referred to the ad hominem argument. "

An ad hominemin argument isn't the same as a personal attack. I believe it means the irrelevant use of an opponent's characteristics to refute that opponent's claim. This site gives a better definition though:

" A debater commits the Ad Hominem Fallacy when he introduces irrelevant personal premisses about his opponent. Such red herrings may successfully distract the opponent or the audience from the topic of the debate. "

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html

Going back to the example I presented, if I said the following or implied it, then I would commit the ad hominem argument:

" we shouldn't believe that CBT is an effective treatment for Social Anxiety Disorder because the claimer is a CBT therapist. "

C.

> > > >

> > > > Hi everyone,

> > > >

> > > > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class

> > > > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and

> > > > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think

> > > > about a lot of things.

> > > >

> > > > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein

> > > > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths

> > > > about confidence and self-esteem.

> > > >

> > > > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two.

> > > >

> > > > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See

> > > > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is

> > > > one of my favorite all time books.

> > > >

> > > > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control

> > > > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where

> > > > you say to yourself " I can't raise my arms " while raising your arms.

> > > >

> > > > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and

> > > > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in

> > > > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that

> > > > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ( " I'm good

> > > > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me " )

> > > >

> > > > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational

> > > > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form

> > > > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to

> > > > overgeneralize. Like, " I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.) " or

> > > > " I am a husband " . He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or

> > > > husband etc. Or " I am a loser " or " you are a loser " or " he is a

> > > > winner " . He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of

> > > > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he

> > > > went to extremes on this.

> > > >

> > > > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of

> > > > writing " She is depressed " he writes the much more awkward statement, " She

> > > > depresses herself "

> > > >

> > > > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it

> > > > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that

> > > > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override

> > > > our nutty nature.

> > > >

> > > > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we

> > > > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something

> > > > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and

> > > > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT

> > > > does not deny the existence of human nature.

> > > >

> > > > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out

> > > > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday.

> > > >

> > > > Cheers!

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Detlef, I, too, am saddened by Hitchens'death. I just recently learned of him and was intrigued by his point of view on so many crucial topics. He lived life the way he wanted to and died at peace with himself, I think. If too many cigarettes and too much booze hastened his death, that was his choice and he probably made it knowingly and lived his life full throttle forward, his way.

The 'crock of shit' to which I referred was your apparent belief that I MUST be self sufficient; else, I am despicable - and it was not an opinion on how you choose to live your life. I have no insightful opinions on that; I don't really know you. If you view that statement as truth and not a crock, so be it. I will make no further effort to convince or persuade or influence you otherwise. Carry on, my friend ... live "fact-fully" as you say Hitchens did.

Helena

From: "michieux" <michieux.au>To: "ACT for the Public" <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 1:02:54 PMSubject: Re: Confidence Gap and Myths

At the moment I'm reeling at the death of a cultural hero of mine: Hitchens. He was diagnosed with esophageal cancer in June last year, and has mounted a valiant resistance campaign ever since. Following his story has been quite emotional and educational. The most perspicacious nugget of wisdom I learned from CH was that death is neither to be feared, endured, nor celebrated: it is to be experienced as much as one is able to consciously experience that 'dying of the light'.As much as I am saddened at his death, I am also gladdened for having known of him.Helena, the 'crock of shit' is your own. It's an opinion. Hitchens's wasn't opinion, it was very real fact. He lived as he wanted, and who are we to gainsay that? Death can be feared, dreaded, and heroic measures employed to avoid. But why? I think that sometimes it's a consummation devoutly to be wished for.Regards,Detlef > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class > > > > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and > > > > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think > > > > about a lot of things. > > > > > > > > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein > > > > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths > > > > about confidence and self-esteem. > > > > > > > > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two. > > > > > > > > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See > > > > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is > > > > one of my favorite all time books. > > > > > > > > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control > > > > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where > > > > you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms. > > > > > > > > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and > > > > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in > > > > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that > > > > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good > > > > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me") > > > > > > > > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational > > > > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form > > > > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to > > > > overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or > > > > "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or > > > > husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a > > > > winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of > > > > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he > > > > went to extremes on this. > > > > > > > > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of > > > > writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She > > > > depresses herself" > > > > > > > > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it > > > > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that > > > > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override > > > > our nutty nature. > > > > > > > > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we > > > > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something > > > > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and > > > > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT > > > > does not deny the existence of human nature. > > > > > > > > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out > > > > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday. > > > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>

[Guest guest]

I'm a huge fan of Hitchens.  I just now learned of his death.  I only learned of his cancer last weekend.  I loved his anti-theism and enjoyed his book god is Not Great.  After reading this book I started to type " god " with small " g " in emails, etc. 

And I loved his " departure from the established political left began in 1989 after what he called the " tepid reaction " of the Western left following Ayatollah Khomeini's issue of a fatwÄ calling for the murder of Salman Rushdie. " And for his enlightenment philosophic views and admiration of Paine, who I also admire.

Like Detlef, I, too, am happy to know of Hitchens.Cheers!

 

At the moment I'm reeling at the death of a cultural hero of mine: Hitchens. He was diagnosed with esophageal cancer in June last year, and has mounted a valiant resistance campaign ever since. Following his story has been quite emotional and educational. The most perspicacious nugget of wisdom I learned from CH was that death is neither to be feared, endured, nor celebrated: it is to be experienced as much as one is able to consciously experience that 'dying of the light'.

As much as I am saddened at his death, I am also gladdened for having known of him.Helena, the 'crock of shit' is your own. It's an opinion. Hitchens's wasn't opinion, it was very real fact. He lived as he wanted, and who are we to gainsay that? Death can be feared, dreaded, and heroic measures employed to avoid. But why? I think that sometimes it's a consummation devoutly to be wished for.

Regards,Detlef

> > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class > > > > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and

> > > > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think > > > > about a lot of things. > > > > > > > > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein

> > > > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths > > > > about confidence and self-esteem. > > > > > > > > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two.

> > > > > > > > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See > > > > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is > > > > one of my favorite all time books.

> > > > > > > > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control > > > > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where > > > > you say to yourself " I can't raise my arms " while raising your arms.

> > > > > > > > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and > > > > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in > > > > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that

> > > > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ( " I'm good > > > > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me " ) > > > >

> > > > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational > > > > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form > > > > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to

> > > > overgeneralize. Like, " I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.) " or > > > > " I am a husband " . He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or > > > > husband etc. Or " I am a loser " or " you are a loser " or " he is a

> > > > winner " . He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of > > > > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he > > > > went to extremes on this.

> > > > > > > > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of > > > > writing " She is depressed " he writes the much more awkward statement, " She

> > > > depresses herself " > > > > > > > > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it > > > > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that

> > > > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override > > > > our nutty nature. > > > > > > > > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we

> > > > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something > > > > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and > > > > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT

> > > > does not deny the existence of human nature. > > > > > > > > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out > > > > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday.

> > > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>

[Guest guest]

I too am a fan of Hitchens, especially his Vanity Fair essays.But when I read of his habitual alcohol intake, I thought he's got to have some issues...Bruce I'm a huge fan of Hitchens. I just now learned of his death. I only learned of his cancer last weekend. I loved his anti-theism and enjoyed his book god is Not Great. After reading this book I started to type "god" with small "g" in emails, etc. And I loved his "departure from the established political left began in 1989 after what he called the "tepid reaction" of the Western left following Ayatollah Khomeini's issue of a fatwÄ calling for the murder of Salman Rushdie." And for his enlightenment philosophic views and admiration of Paine, who I also admire. Like Detlef, I, too, am happy to know of Hitchens.Cheers! At the moment I'm reeling at the death of a cultural hero of mine: Hitchens. He was diagnosed with esophageal cancer in June last year, and has mounted a valiant resistance campaign ever since. Following his story has been quite emotional and educational. The most perspicacious nugget of wisdom I learned from CH was that death is neither to be feared, endured, nor celebrated: it is to be experienced as much as one is able to consciously experience that 'dying of the light'. As much as I am saddened at his death, I am also gladdened for having known of him.Helena, the 'crock of shit' is your own. It's an opinion. Hitchens's wasn't opinion, it was very real fact. He lived as he wanted, and who are we to gainsay that? Death can be feared, dreaded, and heroic measures employed to avoid. But why? I think that sometimes it's a consummation devoutly to be wished for. Regards,Detlef > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class > > > > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and > > > > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think > > > > about a lot of things. > > > > > > > > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein > > > > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths > > > > about confidence and self-esteem. > > > > > > > > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two. > > > > > > > > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See > > > > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is > > > > one of my favorite all time books. > > > > > > > > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control > > > > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where > > > > you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms. > > > > > > > > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and > > > > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in > > > > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that > > > > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good > > > > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me") > > > > > > > > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational > > > > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form > > > > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to > > > > overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or > > > > "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or > > > > husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a > > > > winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of > > > > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he > > > > went to extremes on this. > > > > > > > > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of > > > > writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She > > > > depresses herself" > > > > > > > > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it > > > > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that > > > > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override > > > > our nutty nature. > > > > > > > > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we > > > > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something > > > > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and > > > > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT > > > > does not deny the existence of human nature. > > > > > > > > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out > > > > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday. > > > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>

[Guest guest]

That's very true. My wife seems to enjoy caring for me in my recovery. I've been down for two weeks and she's still pretty cheerful. I'm totally dependent on her for my daily needs. I try hard not to be demanding, though.Bruce Detlef, Looked at another way, your wife is choosing to express her connection and caring values by looking after you. We all need someone to help us through our darker days. Cheers, Stan > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class > > > > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and > > > > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think > > > > about a lot of things. > > > > > > > > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein > > > > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths > > > > about confidence and self-esteem. > > > > > > > > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two. > > > > > > > > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See > > > > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is > > > > one of my favorite all time books. > > > > > > > > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control > > > > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where > > > > you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms. > > > > > > > > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and > > > > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in > > > > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that > > > > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good > > > > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me") > > > > > > > > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational > > > > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form > > > > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to > > > > overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or > > > > "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or > > > > husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a > > > > winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of > > > > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he > > > > went to extremes on this. > > > > > > > > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of > > > > writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She > > > > depresses herself" > > > > > > > > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it > > > > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that > > > > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override > > > > our nutty nature. > > > > > > > > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we > > > > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something > > > > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and > > > > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT > > > > does not deny the existence of human nature. > > > > > > > > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out > > > > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday. > > > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

[Guest guest]

Detlef. This whole "crock of shit" approach to you was just plain wrong. I'm sorry. I am a complete asshole at times - not knowing what to do, what to say, how to help - but I throw something stupid out there anyway. I do know that you know that I care about you. You can put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Helena

To: "ACT for the Public" <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 3:32:05 PMSubject: Re: Re: Confidence Gap and Myths

Detlef, I, too, am saddened by Hitchens'death. I just recently learned of him and was intrigued by his point of view on so many crucial topics. He lived life the way he wanted to and died at peace with himself, I think. If too many cigarettes and too much booze hastened his death, that was his choice and he probably made it knowingly and lived his life full throttle forward, his way.

The 'crock of shit' to which I referred was your apparent belief that I MUST be self sufficient; else, I am despicable - and it was not an opinion on how you choose to live your life. I have no insightful opinions on that; I don't really know you. If you view that statement as truth and not a crock, so be it. I will make no further effort to convince or persuade or influence you otherwise. Carry on, my friend ... live "fact-fully" as you say Hitchens did.

Helena

From: "michieux" <michieux.au>To: "ACT for the Public" <ACT_for_the_Public >Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 1:02:54 PMSubject: Re: Confidence Gap and Myths

At the moment I'm reeling at the death of a cultural hero of mine: Hitchens. He was diagnosed with esophageal cancer in June last year, and has mounted a valiant resistance campaign ever since. Following his story has been quite emotional and educational. The most perspicacious nugget of wisdom I learned from CH was that death is neither to be feared, endured, nor celebrated: it is to be experienced as much as one is able to consciously experience that 'dying of the light'.As much as I am saddened at his death, I am also gladdened for having known of him.Helena, the 'crock of shit' is your own. It's an opinion. Hitchens's wasn't opinion, it was very real fact. He lived as he wanted, and who are we to gainsay that? Death can be feared, dreaded, and heroic measures employed to avoid. But why? I think that sometimes it's a consummation devoutly to be wished for.Regards,Detlef > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > I have a final Monday evening it a graduate Electrical Engineering class > > > > and so need to be studying for that. But during breaks from work and > > > > study, I've been reading Russ's Confidence Gap. It causes be to think > > > > about a lot of things. > > > > > > > > Russ talks about some myths we have - about general things like Einstein > > > > getting bad grades in school to our using only 10% of our brains to myths > > > > about confidence and self-esteem. > > > > > > > > I think a couple of myths that were prevalent in 20th century are these two. > > > > > > > > 1. That humans have no nature or that our minds are Blank Slates. See > > > > Pinker's book The Blank Slate for tons of details on this. This is > > > > one of my favorite all time books. > > > > > > > > 2. That language and what we say and what we think has such strong control > > > > over our behavior and feelings. In CG, Russ has you do experiment where > > > > you say to yourself "I can't raise my arms" while raising your arms. > > > > > > > > These myths I think you see a lot in 20th Century writings and thinking and > > > > theories. You see them in popular self-help books and teachers today in > > > > that they preach you can discard your past and start over fresh and that > > > > positive affirmations will have a great positive effect on you. ("I'm good > > > > enough, I'm smart enough and darn gone it, people like me") > > > > > > > > I think Albert Ellis's obsession with language and disputing irrational > > > > statements went overboard. Ellis wrote whole books without using any form > > > > of the verb to be. He worried that statements using this verb causes us to > > > > overgeneralize. Like, "I am a lawyer (or teacher or engineer, etc.)" or > > > > "I am a husband". He argued you are many things and just a lawyer or > > > > husband etc. Or "I am a loser" or "you are a loser" or "he is a > > > > winner". He often argues that to be a loser means you have to lose 100% of > > > > the time and that we all win some and loss some. True. But I think he > > > > went to extremes on this. > > > > > > > > Also, Ellis sometimes write tying to use more action verbs - so instead of > > > > writing "She is depressed" he writes the much more awkward statement, "She > > > > depresses herself" > > > > > > > > On human nature, Ellis was so bad but still I think in some subtle ways it > > > > crept into in writings and thinking. He had a super optimistic belief that > > > > we nutty humans can greatly reduce our nuttiness and so in a sense override > > > > our nutty nature. > > > > > > > > Now, in CG, Russ says our minds will give you negative thoughts whenever we > > > > step into any kind of uncomfortable position or try to accomplish something > > > > that is new to us. He says this is our nature. This is human nature and > > > > the results of millions of years of evolution. So in this respect, ACT > > > > does not deny the existence of human nature. > > > > > > > > So, any thoughts? Is this interesting? Or is this boring the crap out > > > > you? Let me know. I may not get around to answering until after Monday. > > > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>