Discovered another belief that hides obvious, and sticks around even when baseless.
I find it very hard to think about complex ideas and thoughts without typing my thoughts as I go. I never have to worry about forgetting something that I realized, was considering, or a related prior subject. This frees me up to think outside the box and examine a wide range of possibilities and follow tangents that may be useful or go nowhere with all the intensity I can.
Usually these writings are about work related ideas, game theory, philosophy, amusing ways of looking at life or the universe.. but on occasion they are an examination of my own beliefs. Lately I have been attempting to eradicate belief from my life because belief automatically precludes you from believing the opposite. Well today an old belief of mine had stuck with me, even though the foundations upon which this belief was created no longer existed, yet blinded by belief, I never realized this belief was secretly still there causing me to treat people negatively. All it took for the belief to fall apart was a close examination.
Today I sensed a contradiction in the way I think about satisfaction. I had a vision where I was seeing my reaction to life as a spectrum, with my expectation of reality in the middle and positive and negative outcomes on either side. I began writing as I discovered and removed a harmful belief. I did not discover something new to most of you, in fact its embarrassing to an extent I let a now baseless belief persist even though it so obviously contradicts the best way to treat others. The text below this point is essentially a live recording of my internal thoughts.
What if negative language causes the reverse effect just like violence causes the opposite of what was intended when it comes to action.
Words affect peoples spirit and creativity potentially as much as violence does.
Perhaps a strategy is to transform any negative things into positive things by seeing it on a spectrum and instead of pushing from the anti-negative end by voicing issues, I pull from the positive end. A pull is better than a push because the push often push back! The pull is done by positive reinforcement through praise, compassion and kindness, which becomes an incentive for others to do even more good behavior. Both parties end up richer than when they ended because it was a voluntary exchange where both parties get more than what they started with. When using negative speech however the only party that benefits in the end is the person that pleaded for less negative behavior. Negative speech creates a situation where one party is getting value transfers from the other party and offering nothing in return. This imbalance will eventually be undone in unpleasant and often unrelated ways.
I need to recognize that this is an important shift of policy, so I should not stop here, lets reexamine my previous stance on this issue. I argued to others that it is simpler to only give negative feedback because I see everything as running smoothly except for occasional issues which are worth voicing because it is much more effort and more difficult to understand if I point out the 99% of the time things are going right.
Now I remember the idea that sparked this discussion....it is that if I believe reality is going as planned virtually always, why do I point out negative things more often than positive things...if I already recognize that it is a spectrum, so why do I lean on one side, and how is that at all time saving when both sides should theoretically be equal? It is also possible to go better than reality is supposed to go...but how is that possible? If someone goes beyond expectation or unexpected love and kindness causes me to see reality as going better than planned, but I guess I don't see much of that in my life. That could be the result of the prior issue though, as I stated that the imbalance is undone eventually by either a reduction in positive energy, or an increase in negative behavior. I theorize, and of course this should be obvious, that an increase in positive energy will echo back, but negative energy will never encourage positive energy...isn't that the basis of my "world view condensed into a single sentence" quote that I made? lol..It is, and I need to live by it.
"Love, hate and violence amplify when reciprocated and only cease through antithesis."
New rule: Pointing out negative things should now qualify as negative reinforcement and because negative reinforcement is harmful to humans in the long run, it should be largely eradicated from my interactions with others.
Research Positive Thinking Fallacy.
The goal is not to have positive thinking in my own mind, it is about being mindful of how much negativity and positivity I expose others to such that they likewise interact with others better. In some ways people respond to words similar to actions... kind actions, kind words etc, as long as they are genuine appear to add up to healthy relationships with less suffering.
Awaken with JP has amazing satire videos, but also some of the best advice videos. Here he describes well the issue with artificially increasing positive desires and reactions in your own head.
Where is the difference, I said look up positive thinking fallacy, it's a very easy to understand concept : you shun negative things solely in a hope it attracts positive things.
In retrospect, I should have simply gave up to begin with because it's not gonna convince you, exposing you to logic and sound reason since you ascribe solely to the effect of words outside context. It doesn't matter that I pointed out a major flaw with your magical thinking, fallacy is a negative word, as I take it to you, so you're here arguing about magical thinking and how powerful words without context are.
Let me break it down:
Precisely, the goal is not to form logically sound statements or critically challenging questions, it's to reinforced beliefs, primarily the belief that exposing people to negativity means they interact less optimal than being exposed to positivity, you cannot see it either because you linked me the magical thinking of positive thinking
OK but exemplify kind actions and kind words, and maybe some studies with controls and protocols, not conjectures and suppositions, hopefully you're not turned inward into your magical think and avoid the challenge because I pointed out some more faults in your truth, is it not conjecture, stemming from conjuring or the same principle of magical thinking positive fallacy law of attraction? It's no law, clearly, and it implies in the concept that no action is required, just a priming of magical no negative thinking, and you needed to make it clear that not in yourself, gosh forbid, just towards others because why be responsible for yourself first, it's not like the adage of physician, first heal thyself means much.
Lol, do you really mean to say that if someone thinks people respond to kindness with kindness and compassion makes people more compassionate, that not only do you think that person believes in magic, but that they also are part of a logical fallacy?
That is not at all what the positive thinking fallacy is about. But even if it was, fuck accepting fallacy laws based on conjecture... it falls in line with expert worship if we accept the conclusions of supposed experts as law. Direct experience and facts have priority. If we disagree about the scope of this fallacy, the only way you can really talk to me about this subject is to actually find a way to disagree directly with the concept that people respond positively to genuinely positive things. This is the very basis of my world view, so its going to take more than the name calling of "magic" and "fallacy" to remove that foundation.
"Love, hate and violence amplify when reciprocated and only cease through antithesis."