Years ago while in journalism school, I was bothered by how frequently journalists would say that they’re bad at math. Professors would start the self-deprecating jokes, and students nodded along.
To be sure, I struggle to do arithmetic in my head. To this day, calculating tips at restaurants is a challenge.
But I don’t believe I’m bad at math (or maths, as it’s called in the Commonwealth).
I know how to use a fancy graphics calculator. I passed calculus and statistics in high school. And more recently, I passed my accounting college class. I’m no math wizard but I’m proficient at spreadsheets and data analysis.
So where did journalists adopt
The first time I saw the term “self-limiting belief” was on a forum where some users routinely comment on someone’s post by writing, “Dude, that’s a self-limiting belief! Of course, you’ll never be successful.”
The next time I stumbled upon “self-limiting beliefs” was on Thinking in Bets.
In particular, she cited research from Dan Gilbert, before he became famous for positive psychology research (the study of happiness) and the guy on the Prudential insurance commercials who pushes over dominoes.
In a series of studies published in 1993, Dan Gilbert pits two philosophers’ ideas about belief creation against each other. On one side is René Descartes who postures that humans first understand, then believe. In his view, people can choose the best from the marketplace of ideas to believe.
On the opposing side, Baruch Spinoza posits that understanding and believing are the same mental operation. To understand something, humans believe it as true. Later, they may evaluate whether the belief is false.
Based on Gilbert’s studies, he concludes that Spinoza’s take is more accurate. The brain’s natural method to process information is to believe first and ask questions later.
Seeking truth is a “retroactive” process. In Gilbert’s words, “belief is first, easy, and inexorable and that doubt is retroactive, difficult, and only occasionally successful.” This effect is more pronounced when our brain is under load, such as when we’re distracted or multi-tasking.
Why does this happen?
It’s an evolutionary advantage.
Humans evolved in a world when
If you hear a tiger’s roar behind you, would you stop to ask yourself, “should I believe the hypothesis that there’s a tiger behind is true?” Or would you immediately run to save your life?
Our natural tendency to understand and believe simultaneously probably saved our lives. It is also the foundation for culture and religion. When was the last time people saw a ghost or the Yeti with their own eyes? And yet, how many people believe they exist?
How many self-limiting beliefs do you hold?
Let’s do a quick test.
How do you tell how old a dog is in human years?
In an article by Annie Duke, she writes that if said you take the dog’s age and multiply by 7, then you’d be perpetuating a myth “that’s been circulating since the 13th century.”
Have you heard these beliefs before?
“Kids are expensive.”
“You gains 2 pounds a year well into your middle age.”
“Retirement starts at 65.”
“Fat is bad for your heart.”
“Fat is good for your heart.”
“Veganism is unhealthy.”
“Skipping breakfast is bad for you.”
“You have to spend money to make money.”
In today’s marketplace of ideas, you and I are likely to believe what is thrown at you and me, both the optimistic beliefs as well as the self-limiting beliefs. Later, you may question these beliefs. But probably not.
Annie Duke mentions that it’s tough for the brain to correct itself. It’s easier for others to point out our fallacies.
Emily Thompson suggested mindfulness meditation to foster the self-awareness required to catch yourself in the act.
I opted for both ladies’ advice. For Christmas this year, I asked Alex to “ding” me every time he hears me persist a self-limiting belief.
“Great!” he said with enthusiasm, “I love doing obnoxious stuff like that.”