The Myth of Confidence

[zzzz]

I can list a BOOK of things that I could learn by spending 15 minutes of one-on-one with Kobe, Iverson or Jordan.

It would be a life highlite.

You two would only do something if guaranteed to win or guaranteed to not get an ass-whipping. That's very unwise.

Don't assume anything you pretentious jerk. If what you were saying is true we would never do anything. The fact I'm even replying to you shows I have a lot of confidence since you are being so illogical and unreasonable. Also you are twisting the example around, in a one on one you play to win. You are talking as if Jordan is going to be teaching me, he won't be. He'll crush me with no mercy since I'm horrible at basketball. I could learn more by doing something else such as reading a book on basketball for 15mins. You seem to think you can master any situation with confidence yet at the same time you say the outcome doesn't matter then you reduce the possibilities to "do or do not; there is no try". I believe that quote is from Yoda of all things, is it not?

Some of the most difficult things in my life I knew I could do and decided I would do them. It took a lot of effort and a lot of trial and error still to do them. There are also other things I could probably do but I have some doubt about. This doubt comes not from the fact I doubt my abilities to do it, but I doubt my resolve. You only have a limited amount of time in life. I would rather spend it doing things I am naturally good at and enjoy than trying to overcome my weaknesses and things I dislike.

[YoucancallmeAl]

That's all fine and good, but my point is about Social Confidence.
You can't have social confidence unless you've had social success first.

No, you and Winston have convinced yourselves that this is so.
This is that infinite loop you very intelligent guys get yourselves in, and then you complain it's impossible.

'But I cannot have social success until I have social confidence, and I cannot have social confidence unless I have social success! I am f***ed!'

Wrong! I never said this or suggested anything like it. There is no infinite loop. You are putting words in my mouth.
I never suggested one cannot have social success until they have social confidence. In fact, I said the exact opposite: That confidence is in fact NOT a significant factor in whether one has social success. Someone who looks like Brad Pitt can have zero confidence and girls are still going to like him, flirt with him, say yes to him. My point all along is that confidence is much less of a factor than people would have you believe it is. Got it yet?

It sure wasn't so for me when I walked up to the owner of the first club I would work in and told him that the current DJ was not good.
I had never been in a club DJ booth in my life at that moment.
Belief in yourself.

I already addressed this.
Didn't you read the first time I debunked your illogic?
Remember what I said about the American Idol contestants? Why haven't you responded to that yet?
I'll refesh your memory by repeating it again:

So you had confidence in your DJ abilities and you turned out to be right.
The fallacy in your logic is that your confidence had anything to do with it. It didn't.
Haven't you ever met someone who thought they were a good DJ and yet they sucked?
Lots of people have had confidence in their abilities and turned out to be wrong.
I'm one of them. When I was young I used to believe I was a really good songwriter.
So I spent thousands of dollars recording demos and even self-released an EP. I sent it to local papers to get reviewed.
And they savaged it. They mercilessly pointed out all the flaws and weaknesses in my writing, singing, and playing.
I was shocked. I expected high praise and I got slammed instead. I had confidence.
But my confidence was proven to be delusional.

How could I have known? After all, my friends and family told me my songs were good.
In retrospect, it's obvious they only told me what they thought I wanted to hear instead of being honest with me,
which would have been much more useful. And there are millions who are just as falsely confident as I was.
Haven't you ever watched the American Idol audition shows? It's as funny as it is heartbreaking.
Here are all these supremely confident "singers" who have believed all their lives that they have a great vocal talent
only to end up making complete asses of themselves. How'd all that confidence work out for them, Globetrotter???
Huh? Tell me. How useful was their confidence???

[Winston]

Here are some other articles about the myth of confidence that I found, which made similar points.

http://menwithpens.ca/confidence-myth/

http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Myth-abou ... id=4981979

http://www.scotthyoung.com/blog/2007/04 ... onfidence/

Video: Why confidence is a myth. It is the absence of fear and anxiety and comes from a core knowledge.

[Jackal]

I think everything has been said here already.

Basically, confidence is often good and helpful, but it's not everything.

[mattyman]

I think a lot of people use the term 'confidence' in lieu of 'comfort zone'. The confident you are, the more comfortable you feel in a wider variety of situations. I believe that confidence is not a personality trait, it's your comfort level.

I thing real confidence comes from being amongst the right people. It irritates me that there is this widely held belief that you need to be 'good enough' implying that there's a minimum standard. If you are in an area where people are generally sociable, where you have good friends that accept you as you are as a person, chances are you'll get confident pretty quickly. If however you're in an environment that's cliquey, hostile, suspicious and unfriendly, chances are you'll be there for a mighty long time before you become socially comfortable. I believe that the environment, the people you mix with as well as experience are the biggest determinants of social comfort.

Most advice on the subject seems to preach that it's the other way round, that you need to develop this so-called confidence before you're acceptable. I think that only shallow people would judge someone by how comfortable they appear socially anyway, which is really the same as judging by first impressions and not getting to meet someone halfway. It's helpful to feel comfortable in a wide variety of social situations, it allows you to be who you want to be. I don't think that showing a bit of anxiety and nervousnes is a major fall-back though. Some may disapproave of it, others may not be bothered.

[Grunt]

The saddest and most tragic aspect of American culture is the fact that men spend the vast overwhelming majority of their time either trying to please or defend themselves from American females.

Imagine how much PROGRESS American men could have made if we focused our energies on more productive pursuits? Like electric cars, or stable banking, or corporate responsibility.

But no, were too busy chasing p***y or ripping each other to shreds. Its a crying shame.

[globetrotter]

I can list a BOOK of things that I could learn by spending 15 minutes of one-on-one with Kobe, Iverson or Jordan.

It would be a life highlite.

You two would only do something if guaranteed to win or guaranteed to not get an ass-whipping. That's very unwise.

You are talking as if Jordan is going to be teaching me, he won't be.

Yes, he will. If you listen.

Someone does not need to actively teach you for you to learn.

Like I wrote, you guys don't understand.

[Jackal]

The saddest and most tragic aspect of American culture is the fact that men spend the vast overwhelming majority of their time either trying to please or defend themselves from American females.

Imagine how much PROGRESS American men could have made if we focused our energies on more productive pursuits? Like electric cars, or stable banking, or corporate responsibility.

But no, were too busy chasing p***y or ripping each other to shreds. Its a crying shame.

That's a very good point. Somebody could write a research paper estimating this economic loss (which would be a huge number!), but unfortunately, no one in the US would believe them or listen to them. It's another one of those things which you're forbidden to say in the US...

[Grunt]

I think the immortal Fred Reed once said "If you lack left esteem, go out and do something you would be proud of yourself for doing". I guess since Fred lives in Mexico with his disabled veteran pension (I assume) we know he has a firm grasp on financial issues as well. Maybe Ill move there myself, because Fred also says "There is more to life than debt service". 5 see that as more relevant with each passing year. Even more so as I am $50,000 since I got married with nothing to show for it and no hope of getting out.

[Jackal]

I think the immortal Fred Reed once said "If you lack left esteem, go out and do something you would be proud of yourself for doing".

That's very similar to the Arnold Schwarzenegger quote "Confidence comes from doing."

If you can bench press 60 kg, the you'll be more confident after you can bench press 70 kg. If you can run 2 miles, then you'll feel more confident after you can run 3 miles.

Of course, your abilities have to be relevant to the task you're doing in order to feel some confidence. A bodybuilder won't feel confident during a math test just because he can lift a lot of weight. Similarly, a physics professor won't feel confident when he's chatting up a girl just because he knows a lot about physics.

[zzzz]

Yes, he will. If you listen.

Someone does not need to actively teach you for you to learn.

Like I wrote, you guys don't understand.

I understand all too well. Your version of confidence is delusional.

[globetrotter]

Yes, he will. If you listen.

Someone does not need to actively teach you for you to learn.

Like I wrote, you guys don't understand.

I understand all too well. Your version of confidence is delusional.

No, you don't.

You can be confident in the face of certain defeat.

[zzzz]

So, you have a situation which is impossible but you are confident about your chances? How is that not delusional?

[globetrotter]

This discussion of confidence best describes my attitude and what I am attempting to convey.

"Self-confidence does not necessarily imply a belief in one's ability to succeed. For instance, one may be inept at a particular sport or activity, but remain 'confident' in one's demeanor, simply because one does not place a great deal of emphasis on the outcome of the activity. The key element to self-confidence is, therefore, an acceptance of the myriad consequences of a particular situation, whether they are good or bad. When one does not dwell on negative consequences one can be more 'self-confident' because one is worrying far less about failure or (more accurately) the disapproval of others following potential failure. One is then more likely to focus on the actual situation which means that enjoyment and success in that situation is also more probable. If there is any 'self-belief' component it is simply a belief that one will cope irrespective of what happens."

What I see in you guys, who are all very intelligent, is that you link the concept and feeling of confidence to success at any given endeavor with a p-value that is approaching -0-. You also define 'success' as an outcome that is 100% of what you want, or in the measurement of an obvious metric like the score in a game of HORSE or f***ing the girl. You focus far too much on the negative consequences (you won't get laid, she will reject you) and this destroys your confidence. This causes you to not 'be here now' and you stop focusing on the situation.

I am currently a beginner guitar player. I pay what little I know for my students in appropriate lessons.

I am not good.
I tell them so.
Yet, I am very confident as I play the guitar poorly.

You are all conflating COMPETENCE and MASTERY with CONFIDENCE.

I cannot explain it any plainer than that.

To you success means victory via the obvious measurements. There are other ways to measure success, and confidence is not
synonymous with 'the ability to 100% predict/think if I will be the victor in a given situation'.

Confidence is not an attitude of 'I will win in a game against Kobe Bryant'.
Confidence is an attitude of "I can handle all that occurs in a game against Kobe Bryant."
Overconfidence is excessive belief that I will win when I will probably not win.
Arrogance is belief that one is correct when one is not.

Thus I can be confident in a game with Kobe Bryant and at the same time think that there is a very low probability that my score will be higher than his.
Thus I can be confident in front of an audience of 4,000 as I play the guitar, and play the guitar rather poorly.

There is a massive difference between carrying one self like a loser, and being a loser.

I am confident most of the time, but I am not getting results that you and Winston would think 'justify' such confidence.
This is because I don't link the outcome to my confidence the same way you two do.

I am confident that I can walk out my front door and travel by train to Almaty. There are many problems in doing so from here, yet with no knowledge of where or how to find the solutions, I know that I can and that I will. I have never been there, I speak NO Russian Language and I have no knowledge of visa or border procedures wrt China-Kazakhstan border.

There is a massive difference between being the path, knowing the path and walking the path.
Yes, you might recognize that from The Matrix.
This wisdom, also, predates that movie by millennia.

Also, there is the possibility that I MIGHT beat Kobe in a short game of one-on-one.
I MIGHT connect with a major league fastball and line a double down the line.

Note that you take a low probability situation and then convert it to 'the impossible'.
This is your doing.

To YOU, it is impossible to ever win against Kobe Bryant.
To YOU, it is impossible to get the girl.

To ME it is improbable to win against Kobe Bryant.
But even then, I would be confident during the pickup game.

You catastrophize outcomes.

[adam917]

This discussion of confidence best describes my attitude and what I am attempting to convey.

"Self-confidence does not necessarily imply a belief in one's ability to succeed. For instance, one may be inept at a particular sport or activity, but remain 'confident' in one's demeanor, simply because one does not place a great deal of emphasis on the outcome of the activity. The key element to self-confidence is, therefore, an acceptance of the myriad consequences of a particular situation, whether they are good or bad. When one does not dwell on negative consequences one can be more 'self-confident' because one is worrying far less about failure or (more accurately) the disapproval of others following potential failure. One is then more likely to focus on the actual situation which means that enjoyment and success in that situation is also more probable. If there is any 'self-belief' component it is simply a belief that one will cope irrespective of what happens."

What I see in you guys, who are all very intelligent, is that you link the concept and feeling of confidence to success at any given endeavor with a p-value that is approaching -0-. You also define 'success' as an outcome that is 100% of what you want, or in the measurement of an obvious metric like the score in a game of HORSE or f***ing the girl. You focus far too much on the negative consequences (you won't get laid, she will reject you) and this destroys your confidence. This causes you to not 'be here now' and you stop focusing on the situation.

I am currently a beginner guitar player. I pay what little I know for my students in appropriate lessons.

I am not good.
I tell them so.
Yet, I am very confident as I play the guitar poorly.

You are all conflating COMPETENCE and MASTERY with CONFIDENCE.

I cannot explain it any plainer than that.

To you success means victory via the obvious measurements. There are other ways to measure success, and confidence is not
synonymous with 'the ability to 100% predict/think if I will be the victor in a given situation'.

Confidence is not an attitude of 'I will win in a game against Kobe Bryant'.
Confidence is an attitude of "I can handle all that occurs in a game against Kobe Bryant."
Overconfidence is excessive belief that I will win when I will probably not win.
Arrogance is belief that one is correct when one is not.

Thus I can be confident in a game with Kobe Bryant and at the same time think that there is a very low probability that my score will be higher than his.
Thus I can be confident in front of an audience of 4,000 as I play the guitar, and play the guitar rather poorly.

There is a massive difference between carrying one self like a loser, and being a loser.

I am confident most of the time, but I am not getting results that you and Winston would think 'justify' such confidence.
This is because I don't link the outcome to my confidence the same way you two do.

I am confident that I can walk out my front door and travel by train to Almaty. There are many problems in doing so from here, yet with no knowledge of where or how to find the solutions, I know that I can and that I will. I have never been there, I speak NO Russian Language and I have no knowledge of visa or border procedures wrt China-Kazakhstan border.

There is a massive difference between being the path, knowing the path and walking the path.
Yes, you might recognize that from The Matrix.
This wisdom, also, predates that movie by millennia.

Also, there is the possibility that I MIGHT beat Kobe in a short game of one-on-one.
I MIGHT connect with a major league fastball and line a double down the line.

Note that you take a low probability situation and then convert it to 'the impossible'.
This is your doing.

To YOU, it is impossible to ever win against Kobe Bryant.
To YOU, it is impossible to get the girl.

To ME it is improbable to win against Kobe Bryant.
But even then, I would be confident during the pickup game.

You catastrophize outcomes.

So basically you're saying confidence is simply the practice of not giving a shit.