The classic differentiator between optimism and cynicism is the half glass of water. It takes a neutral fact and adds a judgement that tells us much about the observers life view, half empty or half full. I think it is possible for either view to overstep its bounds, be it Pollyanna type platitudes or cynical misrepresentations of the motivations of others leading to prejudice and division. One popular truism in the cynical worldview is that it is the same people doing both, that the dreamer is always destined to become the cynic. I do believe this is a possibility and a danger, but I question the underlying assumption. Are optimists just fooling themselves? Do they become cynical when they face up to the truth? There is a certain school of thought, ascribing cynicism to realism with a certain self righteousness about “keeping it real.” Is this valid?
I was recently listening to RadioLab, a newly discovered, mind stretching podcast, on the subject of deception. The had a couple of scientists describe a social experiment from the 70s about ” lying to yourself.” They came up with a list of terribly personal questions that no one would want to say yes to, but they figured were universally true. Questions like “Do you enjoy your bowel movements?” or “Have you ever doubted your sexual adequacy?” and “Have you ever thought of committing suicide just to get back at someone?”
The study showed that people who answered No, to all these questions were more likely to be happy and successful in life. Thus, they concluded, people who lie to themselves are happier. I think there are a lot of conclusions that could be drawn from this study, mostly about the scientists, but I’m not sure that self deception leads to success is one of them.
What the researchers neglected to think of was self-deception in the emotionally unhealthy individual. In the throes of depression, you tell yourself lies every day. Thoughts about being completely worthless hammer away at your self esteem. Your mind thinks in exaggerations or absolutes, which are almost never true. For example,
I cannot be happy unless everyone likes me.
If I do what is expected of me, my life will be wonderful.
Bad things don’t happen to good people.
Good things don’t happen to bad people.
In the end, bad people will always get punished.
If I am intelligent (or work hard), I will be successful.
What makes these untrue is the expectation that they are always true. They are too black or white, all or nothing. It is only by learning to see that these thoughts aren’t necessarily true that you can move on and be happy. The depressed person might think everyone thinks they are stupid or dislikes them. Anyone who smiles at them must be laughing at them. These are things that are often neutral or difficult to interpret and the negative bias skews them every time.
Anxiety works the same way, magnifying molehills into mountains. We imagine the worst case scenario in every scene we enter. If it doesn’t happen, we were “lucky.” For example,
- One person at work does not like you, and tells you, so you know it’s not mistaken judgment. You then assume no one at work likes you, or you assume that you must be a terrible person if he/she does not like you.
- You make a small mistake on a project, and assume that you will be fired when the boss finds out.
- You try your hand at a new hobby, and it does not turn out well. You conclude, “I’m no good at anything.”
This is clearly lying to your self every bit as much as whether or not you enjoy bowel movements. I think it is clearly more so. The key in cognitive behavioral therapy isn’t to turn these thoughts into sunshiny happiness. It works by first challenging validity, removing value judgements, and if the thought is true, asking yourself, “But is this helpful.” or “What do I need to do to make it better.” This empowers you to action, keeps you in the present where you can act.
I think this kind of thinking is what makes optimists remain optimists. I seriously doubt that telling a stranger if they ever questioned their sexual prowess has much to do with what makes people successful. The self esteem to defeatedly admit such, probably does however. Maybe it is just part of the skill of “putting on a good face.” I will admit that too some extent we all wear a mask. I would contend that taking the mask too seriously and comparing others “charmed life” to your own is much more dishonest.
Maybe assuming everyone who says no is lying is also a strategy of dealing with personal inadequacies, by tearing others down rather than building yourself up. Conflating happy with delusional may have its own utility, but I can’t really call it fundamentally honest or likely to make you any more successful or happy.
I think its much more courageous and hopeful to take a look at our faults for what they are, and determine we can improve them. Certainly this is more “True” to yourself. I guess that is in the end where the rub is. Honestly, the half glass of water is neither half empty or half full. It is just a half glass of water. If we want more, we should get more, but complaining doesn’t help. Realizing what we have, and feeling gratitude, on the other hand, is a type of honesty I think most of us fall short of a great deal of the time. When we speculate on the future, all we know is really a guess. That makes anything possible, and the truth what you make it. So here’s to optimism, true to ourselves, true to life, and true to our potential.
Mind, Soul, and Body 
10 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 17, 2008 at 2:08 am
LDS Anarchist
I see that glass as filled to the brim with a 50/50 ratio of air and water. So, what does that make me?
I’ve got many thoughts about this post. What comes to mind are the strategies used by both Christ and Satan in building up or tearing down people. Christ says to people that the worth of their souls is great and brings them the good news of the gospel, while telling people to repent of their wicked ways. On the other hand, Satan will appeal to the pride of people, telling them how great they are, how much they deserve the adoration of the world and the happiness of riches, how they can “do it themselves,” but for other people he breaks down their ego, saying that they are worthless and should spare the world their miserable existence by committing suicide. On the surface, it appears that both beings are building up and tearing down, yet God never tears down and Satan never builds up. God is all about creation and the devil is all about destruction.
So, there has got to be another gauge to judge whether our perspective is true or false. Leaving clinically depressed people out of it, as the body can get so out of whack, due, for example, to chronic dehydration, where the water salt ratio of the body is low-really low, which is why lithium, a salt substitute, is often given, life experiences, trials, tribulations and anything which truly is unfair can put people into situations in which their beliefs come into question. Reality is, to a great extent, what we perceive (or believe) it to be. The gauge, then, that I have found, based upon my own experiences, that tips people into the optimistic side or over to the side of a cynic, is faith.
This may sound overly simplistic, but my experience doesn’t show it to be. Everything done by God, whether telling you you are a vile sinner or that you can receive forgiveness and salvation and are valued in His eyes, is calculated to generate faith in you, whereas, the devil’s words, even when he tells you you are the greatest ever to walk the earth, so that your head expands in pride and vanity, are made to remove faith from you. When faced with life’s challenges, from whatever quarter, it is faith which brings with it hope, that sees a person through them optimistically, whereas those who have no faith, or very little of it, sink into despair.
The link between the spirit and the body is such, though, that a weakened spirit (reduced in faith) will weaken the body and a weakened body will weaken the spirit, starting a vicious cycle. So, both spirit and body (or mind and spirit) should be “treated” simultaneously for depressed states. Interestingly enough, the treatment for depression is what is seen and not seen in that glass.
Finally, to answer your initial question, Optimism vs. Cynicism, which is more untrue?, I’d say it depends. Wickedness never was happiness so being optimistic at finding eternal joy in wickedness is self-deception, while the cynics who say that there is no salvation in Jesus are fooling themselves. There is a time for optimism and a time for cynicism and in my estimation, we can safely or truly be optimistic in whatever generates faith and wisely be pessimistic of whatever removes faith.
March 17, 2008 at 9:42 am
Ray
Interesting post.
Although, I think one should not put the weight of the world on someone’s shoulder only because of sentence or word structure.
After all, someone might only judge because of his or her angle at the glass. From the top, the first half is empty – from the bottom or the side the first half maybe filled with water.
Anyway, kind regards.
March 17, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Doc
LDSA,
Could you give me an example of optimistic wickedness? I’m not sure I understand. The pride or inflated sense of worth you describe isn’t what I typically think of with optimism. For one thing, it denigrates others around you. Pride, as C.S. Lewis wrote, takes no pleasure out of having something, only out of having more of it than the next man. Pride relies on enmity and contempt between human beings. Optimism doesn’t fit very neatly into this picture for me I can imagine being comfortable and complacent perhaps, but is this really optimism? Furthermore, is it really happiness?
Furthermore, faith and pessimism don’t seem to mix well for me either. What would be your specific example of pessimism true and from God. The only thing I can think of is perhaps millennarianism, but even this seems to miss the point. “True” millenarianism in my view is about preparing the Earth for his coming (optimistic and assertive), not just sitting and accepting that the world is destined to rot until consumed by fire (pessimistic and passive).
In regards to being a vile sinner, does making a mistake make you vile? Does recognizing you’re vile help you change or increase your faith? I understand the importance of Godly sorrow and repentance, but in the end the gospel is very optimistic. The atonement of Jesus Christ is about the power to change and to not have to give up when we fall short.
Ray,
Thanks for the comment. Analogies can absolutely be taken too far. You bring up an interesting point, though. Perspective is important. There is a lot of power in realizing our perspective is limited. It requires faith and trust to continue in hope despite apparent hopelessness by taking a more eternal viewpoint. Again I ask, is this self deception?
March 19, 2008 at 7:29 pm
LDS Anarchist
Examples of optimistic wickedness:
One definition of optimism is merely anticipating the best possible outcome of your actions.
As for pessimism, the whole gamut of scriptures is pessimistic toward sin. Like its opposite, optimism, pessimism (one definition of this word, at least) is anticipating the worst possible outcome of an action, circumstance, etc. So, the consequence of unrepentant sin is always the worst possible outcome: the second death. There is no other final penalty mentioned in the scriptures. Only the penitent escape the this penalty, which why the gospel offers us hope.
Concerning vile sinners, mistakes and sins can be the same, or they can be different. If I make a driving mistake and cause an accident, I haven’t sinned, but have made a grave mistake, especially if such a mistake causes unintentional damage. Some mere mistakes cause death and destruction, but do not necessarily put the eternal salvation of the individual who committed the error at risk, but sin consists of those things that require the second death for the one who committed it, if it is not repented of. All sin is vile because of its eternal consequences. And it is healthy to recognize its vileness, which is why the prophets of the scriptures emphasize the enormity of the penalty of unrepentant sin. People need to understand just how great the consequences will be, as that understanding leads to faith, repentance and healing. Only when mistakes and sins are blended together does one go into “unhealthy” ground, as that is a tool of deception that the devil uses to snare us.
March 20, 2008 at 9:00 am
Doc
LDSA,
Okay, you may have some point about optimism. I don’t see eat, drink, and be merry carrying you that far in the long run, but you could call it optimism and definitely a lie.
The tragedy of sin is immense, the suffering it causes is intense. Certainly, it is healthy to mourn such things, but overfocus on these motivates by fear, a telestial motivation. It is doomed to fail unless we can get a higher perspective. Perhaps that is part of the healing/repentance process. Faith and fear are simply not compatible. Faith casts out fear and ennobles us. Fear often leads to burying sins, Faith leads to repentance.
April 4, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Fixing cracks in the system. « Mind, Soul, and Body
[…] we may not be able to change. It lets anger fester until it twists and distorts us. It breeds cynicism and […]
May 1, 2008 at 3:12 am
Glenn
Doc — Really interesting post. I should probably read it a few more times to make sure I really understand it before I comment, because what I have to say may be a bit off-topic, but I have a bit of a headache and I’m feeling a little lazy at the moment…
I am very interested in this idea of self-deception. You put an optimist/pessimist spin on it I normally don’t think about, but when I was studying folklore, we talked about legends as serving a validating function — a story that justifies a belief. For example, if you have a belief in guardian angels, the story of someone’s near-brush-with death will support that belief — sometimes whether there is any mention of divine intervention at all.
At its heart, this idea is really a euphemism for self-deception. As a result, I started looking at stories I grew up with (especially the miraculous faith-affirming stories) as playing such an incredibly formative role in my own worldview. These would perhaps be the more “optimistic” sort, although you have the more “pessimistic” cautionary tales as well (i.e. don’t pray to devil to prove the existance of God because we all know about the white-haired Elder Corpse who tried that one). These stories form a reality in our mind, and it made me really question the validity of that reality.
I expect you are familiar with Elizabeth Loftus and her research on the maliability of memory? Memories of events that never happened can be created and nourished until they are so vividly detailed and textured that they feel absolutely real. Scary stuff. So whether it is optimistic or pessimistic, your question about “which is more untrue” is really interesting to me. I think they are equally… um… suspicious.
Sorry for not developing a more coherent questions, but I’m curious to know your thoughts on how these things all tie together. I’m glad I stumbled across your site. It is full of interesting stuff and a great forum to expose my ever growing ignorance.
May 1, 2008 at 11:17 am
Doc
Glenn,
Thanks for the comment. The impetus for the whole post was basically to counter the idea that the happiest people are the most self decieved. I know from experience that this is false as depressed people have all kinds of invalid perceptions.
As you note, “self deception” or at least unreliable memory is seems to be a fact of the human condition. Cognitive errors are extremely common and without question we all hold beliefs true that are in reality false. We are all limited by our culture or the traditions of our fathers. We also gain a lot of truth, “standing on the shoulders of giants” when it comes on to learning from those who have gone before us. The fact that our minds or our culture is fallible is no reason to reject everyone’s point of view.
From what I see, there are a couple of possible responses to this, become cynical, skeptical and debunk everything everyone says and stop believing anything. For me this seems like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. It is locked in on the idea that truth is the only way anything has value and that ideas are either completely true or totally false. I also think there is a strong element of emotional response in the reaction and the emotions aren’t pleasant ones. They are a soul destroying sense of disillusionment, betrayal, and wounded pride.
I prefer to find what is good and hold onto it, reevaluating it periodically with the realization that I could be totally wrong, or have an incomplete picture. For me, this concept provides humility. Like Moses in the POGP, “I have learned that man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed.” It is important to be both open to ideas and to try to evaluate our preconcieved notions. I think it is an important part of personal growth. I guess I see both not necessarily untrue as much a different ways of looking at sterile facts or ideas to give them meaning.
I prefer optimism, although I do struggle with a closet cynical streak periodically. I do object to the categorization of this as self decieving. Truth certainly has levels, just because we fine tune parts as understanding becomes more complete doesn’t mean we were completely wrong to begin with. I feel a post coming on.
May 1, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Glenn
Well put. Again, I have never considered that happy people are any more self-decieved than depressed people because I think we are all pretty evenly self decieved, which is what I really liked about your post.
The fact that our minds or our culture is fallible is no reason to reject everyone’s point of view.
Agreed. And I would change that to say “The fact that our minds or our culture is fallible is no reason to reject anyone’s point of view” and even go so far as to say that because of this universal human condition, it is dangerous to assume that any one group has more truth or better truth than any other. It’s a level playing field. I didn’t always think it was, and I still have minor conflicts with people who don’t like that egalitarian idea at all.
Do you think it is possible to become cynical, skeptical and debunk everything everyone says is “absolute truth” — to reject that it is absolute truth, but still have a hope, faith, desire that it might be true? I think that is what you are saying when you are talking about humility — the acknowledgement that we may be wrong.
“Self deception” is rather pejorative in its connotations, but if you can agree that our minds and our culture define our reality and that we make daily choices that, to some extent, define our minds and our culture, then “self deception” isn’t too far off.
Looking forward to that next post.
May 3, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Doc
Glenn,
Yes, I do think it is possible to be skeptical of claims to absolute truth and yet maintain a hope they might be true. Rejection is a spectrum, but I suppose the absolute part might be rejectable. Arguing and reasoning against it is good but cynicism and debunking aren’t always useful. Certainty may block change, but attacking certainty is usually not all that effective. I don’t quite see the purpose of “debunking” what people hold as absolute. I see more value in examining and pondering the relative strengths and weakness of their position and perhaps gently helping others to do so as well.
I believe there is absolute truth, even that it can be circumscribed into one great whole. The problem is that cultural, short sighted, and finite creatures that we are, we cannot comprehend the whole thing perfectly. We can get ourselves into trouble if we try, and then pridefully raise ourselves above others because of it.
The word cynical is a problem for me because it implies a snap judgement, and a feeling of dismissal. I don’t think that is anyway to interact with others on spiritual matters. It smacks of pride and lacks charity as much as certainty. It has an biting edge. I understand the impulse. I think in many ways it is an expression of pain and mourning over lost naivete. At some point, we have to let go of the pain. There is a fine balance expressing natural pain and becoming consumed by it. Feeding pain and simultaneously clinging to hope seems to me like a tug of war that one side will have to lose eventually. Bottling pain up only strengthens it, but feeding it does the same. Eventually cynicism will close us off to our own humanity if it goes to long unchecked.