Affirming Optimism

These days I'm reading a book called "Learned Optimism" (1990) by Martin Seligman for a psychology course. It's a fascinating book, which looks at the nature, drawbacks, and benefits of an optimistic world-view. We'll explore this book more in a later post after I finish reading it, but for now I want to look at a mechanism which Seligman believes drives a person to think in either an optimistic or pessimistic vein. This mechanism is called "explanatory style."

Explanatory style details the way a person explains experiences to themselves, both "good" and "bad." According to Seligman, pessimists tend to view failures and set-backs as permanent ("I'm all washed-up"), pervasive ("I'm a failure at everything"), and internally personal ("I'm too stupid to do anything right") (pp. 46-50). When things go wrong, the pessimist tends to see a permanent failure, which pervades everything he or she does in life, and is caused by some personal deficit or weakness. Even when things go well, pessimists tend to see the root of their success as temporary ("I was just lucky") rather than as a reflection of their own talent and skill. Conversely, optimists tend to view failure and set-backs as temporary ("I was tired, just not my day"), specific ("this training regimen is useless" rather than "all training regimens are useless"), and externally personal ("I have no luck at poker").  When things go well, optimists tend to see it as a reflection of their own effort rather than the lucky convergence of temporary forces. While this means optimists sometimes overestimate their personal role in a successful outcome, it is hard to deny that when times get tough that those who do not quit tend to have an optimistic explanatory style.

Curiously, that notion is at the heart of another book called "Running Within" (1999) by Jerry Lynch and Warren Scott. Without explicitly naming it, the entire book focuses on changing a runner's explanatory style. Of prime importance is the way we "talk" to ourselves about set-backs, challenges, and everyday life. To this end, Lynch and Scott like to use affirmations. Affirmations are phrases one says one's self to keep a positive or relaxed mindset. Interestingly, they also tend to produce an optimistic explanatory style. Consider some affirmations below:

"Calm and confident, I race well."
"Good competitors are gifts, enabling me to run my best."
"I may or may not win, but I run like a well-trained athlete."
"Fatigue is a necessary step in exploring my full potential."
"All things come to those who wait...I persist each day in every way."
"Stress, then rest." 
"Fatigue is my friend, I embrace it for all it's worth." 
"Like a child at play, I ask my mind to stay." 
"When I act as if, I get a good lift!" 
"Expect success, I'm running my best." 
"I focus on the process, and the results take care of themselves." 
"My opponent is a gift who pushes me to greater heights." 
"Failures are lessons, helping me to constantly improve." (Lynch & Scott, 45, 70, 76, 84, 99, 108, 117, 128, 144 )

Each affirmation seeks either to address a specific negative thought, or elicit a specific positive response. For example, the affirmation "Good competitors are gifts..." tries to help an athlete reinterpret the person they're racing. It's easy to get intimidated by a fit-looking competitor, particularly when he or she looks fast. But if we think of them as gifts that help us run well rather than as opponents we must defeat or else, their ability becomes a tool to help us get better. If they are strong, we will need all our strength to come out ahead, perhaps employing gears we never knew we had.

Consider another affirmation, "I focus on the process, and the results take care of themselves." As many runners have learned, we are entitled neither to results or success. Yet in any competitive field, our worth is often (unfairly) measured by our results and little else. As such it is tempting to think only of results, and become frustrated when they do not come as easily as thinking them. By emphasizing the process, the above affirmation seeks to keep a runner focused on training, letting the results come as a reflection of a successful process. By doing so, the hope is to prevent the athlete from tying up their personal worth with results.

The point is, Lynch and Scott make a useful insight which mirrors Seligman's; both connect thoughts with the way we interpret experiences. This in turn affects subsequent behavior, whether we persist in the face of adversity or quit. In earlier posts we've referred to this quality as "character," but the works we've discussed here suggest at least part of character is tied up with the nature of our interpretations. It is a matter perhaps worth considering.

Happy Monday :)