Positive Attitude | How to be more optimistic

1. Stop using negative phrases … such as “I can’t,” “It’s impossible,” or “This won’t work.” Such statements program your mind to look for negative results.

2. When asked “How are you?” … respond with “Terrific!” or “Fabulous!” or “I’ve never felt better!” rather than a depressing “OK” or “Getting by.”

3. Stop complaining … about things over which you have no control—such as the economy, your company, or your customers.

4. Stop griping … about your personal problems and illnesses. What good does it do, other than to depress you and everyone else?

5. Substitute neutral words … for emotionally loaded ones. For example, rather than saying “I’m enraged!” say “I’m a bit annoyed”—or, better yet, “I’ve got a real challenge.”

6. Expunge profanity and obscenity … from your vocabulary. Such words are always signs of a lazy mind that can’t think of something really witty to say.

source: http://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/become-more-optimistic-6-tricks.html

Self-Image is the key to success

“There are no limitations to the mind except those we acknowledge.”–Napoleon Hill

It has been conclusively demonstrated that individuals who expect to succeed at a given venture are more likely to do so than those who expect to fail. Positive expectations work as a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy–those who expect to succeed are more likely to do so, thus maintaining and reinforcing their expectation for success.

Today, we are going to take this analysis one step further and address the underlying cause of these expectations.

The expectations we have for ourselves are largely determined by our self-image. The opinion you have of yourself directly impacts your expectations and thus your chances for success in ventures of all sorts.

If you consider yourself a slow learner, chances are you will remain so.

If you believe that you cannot learn a foreign language, you aren’t likely to do so.

If you believe that you can’t grow a profitable business, chances are that you never will.

As Henry Ford once said, “If you think you can or think you can’t, you’re right.”

The key to unlocking success in business and in life, therefore, lies in creating a strong self-image. How can you do this?

Don’t dwell on negativity. All people experience failure at some point in their lives. Michael Jordan was famously cut from his high school basketball team. Steve Jobs was fired from Apple in the 1980s before returning in the late 1990s. Failure is inevitable–when it happens, learn your lesson and move on!

Step out of your comfort zone. The best way to construct a positive self image is to prove to yourself that you can succeed. Successes, even small ones, create a serotonin release in your brain and this makes you feel good , encouraging you to challenge yourself further. Whether it is learning a new language, mastering a new skill, or even something as simple as reading a book that you have been procrastinating, setting and achieving goals is essential to create a strong self image.

Create a list of accomplishments and refer to it regularly. Once your mind has developed a habit of negativity, it takes work to change it. Keep a list of your accomplishments, both big and small, and refer to it often. Stars keep their Oscars and athletes their trophies, create your own success wall or shelf. Over time, you will begin to see yourself as you really are…an individual with unlimited potential.

Sure, concrete limitations do exist. No matter how strongly you believe in yourself, you can’t flap your arms and fly. But the truth is that, for most people, their perceived limitations are far more restrictive than their true limitations.

In order to achieve the success you desire, both in business and in life, it is essential that you remove the limitations you have placed on yourself. And it all starts with a strong self image. The tips discussed above will help.

source: http://www.fastcompany.com/1813313/self-image-the-key-to-success-in-business-and-in-life

Social Darwinism and Civilizationism

Social Darwinism was described as social forces formulating social laws similar to natural ones. As results of such process of creating social laws during the centuries we could notice certain evolutionary progress.

Unfortunately evolution which is based on the same principles as biological evolution – the ‘survival of the fittest’.

So on the evolutionary way it was inevitable that natural conflicts between social groups had place.

So we could say Social Darwinism is evolution through conflict.

And so as we can read on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism Social Darwinism had some criticism as there was many similarities to ideologies such us Hitler’s.

Although mankind still remains in mammal-world rather than spiritual our approach of looking on forces of evolution should change. As we no longer struggle for food, we don’t have to be physically strong anymore.  We DON’T HAVE to FIGHT for survivor, we choose to fight for more which is never enough. So ‘survival of the fittest’ is no longer required in that sense. However we have to evaluate in emotionally and intellectually.

Following principle ‘survival of the fittest’ applied to whole mankind race rather than applied to individuals or groups.

That is what I would describe as Civilizationism. That individualism and conflict is just one way of evolution, not very effective. Another more efficient way of evolution is mutual respect and combined intelligence. As a race we still have long way to learn how to control our emotions, our mammal instincts – our nature. But at least we started talking about it…. it is good start anyway.

 Civilizationism is my way to describe an intelligent way of evolving – intelligent evolution.

Why little things matter? [happiness]

What seem to be confirms by reality is the factors appointed by psychologist Ed Diener. As we can read in Harvard Business Review magazine Jan-Feb 2012

“He essentially shows that the frequency of you positive experiences is a much better predictor of your happiness than is the intensity of your positive experiences.

When we think about what would make us happy, we tend to think of intense events – going on a date with a movie star, winning a Pulitzer, buying a yacht. But Diener and his colleagues have shown that how good your experiences are doesn’t matter nearly as much as how many good experiences you have.

Somebody who has a dozen mildly nice things happen each day is likely to be happier than somebody who has a single truly amazing thing happen.

So wear comfortable shoes,  give your wise big kiss, sneak a French fry. It sounds like small stuff, and it is.

But the small stuff matters.”

source: Harvard Business Review magazine Jan-Feb 2012 p88

Asperger syndrome – mindset of Nobel prize laureates?

Asperger syndrome, also known as Asperger’s syndrome or Asperger disorder, is an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) that is characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction, alongside restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests. It differs from other autism spectrum disorders by its relative preservation of linguistic and cognitive development. Although not required for diagnosis, physical clumsiness and atypical use of language are frequently reported.

Asperger syndrome is named after the Austrian pediatrician Hans Asperger who, in 1944, studied and described children in his practice who lacked nonverbal communication skills, demonstrated limited empathy with their peers, and were physically clumsy. Fifty years later, it was standardized as a diagnosis, but many questions remain about aspects of the disorder. For example, there is doubt about whether it is distinct from high-functioning autism (HFA); partly because of this, its prevalence is not firmly established. It has been proposed that the diagnosis of Asperger’s be eliminated, to be replaced by a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder on a severity scale.

The exact cause is unknown, although research supports the likelihood of a genetic basis; brain imaging techniques have not identified a clear common pathology. There is no single treatment, and the effectiveness of particular interventions is supported by only limited data. Intervention is aimed at improving symptoms and function. The mainstay of management is behavioral therapy, focusing on specific deficits to address poor communication skills, obsessive or repetitive routines, and physical clumsiness. Most children improve as they mature to adulthood, but social and communication difficulties may persist. Some researchers and people with Asperger’s have advocated a shift in attitudes toward the view that it is a difference, rather than a disability that must be treated or cured

Agrophobia “fear of the marketplace”

The word agoraphobia is derived from Greek words literally meaning “fear of the marketplace.”  The term is used to describe an irrational and often disabling fear of being out in public.

Agoraphobia is just one type of phobia, or irrational fear. People with phobias feel dread or panic when they face certain objects, situations, or activities. People with agoraphobia frequently also experience panic attacks, but panic attacks, or panic disorder, are not a requirement for a diagnosis of agoraphobia. The defining feature of agoraphobia is anxiety about being in places from which escape might be embarrasing or difficult, or in which help might be unavailable. The person suffering from agoraphobia usually avoids the anxiety-provoking situation and may become totally housebound.

Causes and symptoms

Agoraphobia is the most common type of phobia, and it is estimated to affect between 5-12% of Americans within their lifetime. Agoraphobia is twice as common in women as in men and usually strikes between the ages of 15-35.
The symptoms of the panic attacks which may accompany agoraphobia vary from person to person, and may include trembling, sweating, heart palpitations (a feeling of the heart pounding against the chest), jitters, fatigue, tingling in the hands and feet, nausea, a rapid pulse or breathing rate, and a sense of impending doom.

Treatment

Treatment for agoraphobia usually consists of both medication and psychotherapy. Usually, patients can benefit from certain antidepressants, such as amitriptyline (Elavil), or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, such as paroxetine (Paxil), fluoxetine (Prozac), or sertraline (Zoloft). In addition, patients may manage panic attacks in progress with certain tranquilizers called benzodiazepines, such as alprazolam (Xanax) or clonazepam (Klonipin).
The mainstay of treatment for agoraphobia and other phobias is cognitive behavioral therapy. A specific technique that is often employed is called desensitization. The patient is gradually exposed to the situation that usually triggers fear and avoidance, and, with the help of breathing or relaxation techniques, learns to cope with the situation. This helps break the mental connection between the situation and the fear, anxiety, or panic. Patients may also benefit from psychodynamically oriented psychotherapy, discussing underlying emotional conflicts with a therapist or support group. With proper medication and psychotherapy, 90% of patients will find significant improvement in their symptoms.

source: http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Agrophobia

Brain’s ability to form new memories is regulated by 1 gene?

Neuroscientists identify a master controller of memory!

When you experience a new event, your brain encodes a memory of it by altering the connections between neurons. This requires turning on many genes in those neurons. Now, MIT neuroscientists have identified what may be a master gene that controls this complex process.

The findings, described in the Dec. 23 issue of Science, not only reveal some of the molecular underpinnings of memory formation — they may also help neuroscientists pinpoint the exact locations of memories in the brain.

The research team, led by Yingxi Lin, a member of the McGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT, focused on the Npas4 gene, which previous studies have shown is turned on immediately following new experiences. The gene is particularly active in the hippocampus, a brain structure known to be critical in forming long-term memories.

Lin and her colleagues found that Npas4 turns on a series of other genes that modify the brain’s internal wiring by adjusting the strength of synapses, or connections between neurons. “This is a gene that can connect from experience to the eventual changing of the circuit,” says Lin, the Frederick and Carole Middleton Career Development Assistant Professor of Brain and Cognitive Sciences.

To investigate the genetic mechanisms of memory formation, the researchers studied a type of learning known as contextual fear conditioning: Mice receive a mild electric shock when they enter a specific chamber. Within minutes, the mice learn to fear the chamber, and the next time they enter it, they freeze.

read more http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/hippocampus-memory-genes-1222.html

Curiosity- Science vs. God. How Howkings questions His existence and creations.

Ancient people translated unexplained things that it was God’s creation or will – laugh the sun was considered to be the wrath of God.

Forces of nature today explained by science back in time took the shape of God in the human imagination. So what was God to Ancient people? Force or something they couldn’t not even understand, but explain with any known reasoning. As natural way of mankind is assuming everything is a consequence of for some event.

God is a product of human imagination in response the continuous need to satisfy curiosity.

And no linkage to cause resulted with conclusion – it must be God. Some intelligent people must realized that it is a temporary explanation and sooner or later, people are going to find out the truth and explain mysterious act of God with scientific the facts. Now we would call such person prophet or seer (prophecy tellers). Where in fact whole secret is deep and very accurate understanding of human nature and taking general human behaviour predicting where it might
lead us. Taking on the account that billions of people tried to predict the future, 20 of the were accurate doesn’t give them special powers does it?

Basic instincts archetype triangle – power money & sex
So why some were saying “curiosity is the first degree to hell” and the science is an act of Satan? Because they feared to lose their power over others? Loose their comfortable lives? Loosing status of privileged. Nothing more than simple fact of manipulating masses to achieve personal satisfaction, social position and satisfy basic instincts triangle – power money & sex.

We can not deny that curiosity is one of the important driving forces of development of civilization. Challenging environment and questioning processes is the most important argument which allowed humanity come so far.

But I am afraid we are still at very early stage of our intelligence and civilization development. Stage which does not allow us yet to understand how universe works same way thousand years ago people could not explain why there is eclipse of the sun. Thanks to people like Galileo, Einstein and other prominent people who contributed so much to mankind. Some directly, others indirectly giving others background to finding a solution/explanations. Howkins theory might be not giving direct or understandable answers. But definitely it is showing completely new approach, new angle of seeing things.  Maybe not in our lifetime, but maybe in our lifetime stroke, spark of “insanely-simple” light will be born is someone’s head after reading such articles?

However we cannot abandon  idea of God as it is with as for thousand of years. It is not something you can just walk out and say it out loud. But what we can do is to take small step and try to change it a little. Trying to convince people not to think about God as creator and forces we do not understand, but forces we do know very well and understand very well. God as part of human nature which pushes us to do good, be creative, feel compassion and love. God as a strength
which allows us to help other people.  God as good force appearing in name of God, Karma, Buddha, love or whatever you want to call it. God is nothing else than “will power” of human nature.

Answering question does God exist, did He created universe? Answer still remain unchanged: WE DON’T KNOW.  As for me  it is believing in good side of people (at least some of them…and maybe
not always…) hmm…

What if we managed to send back in time piece of information or even human being? What if that someone was named Jesus? Definitely he was wise man who seem to realize or be aware of facts we know today or/and will know in next 100, 200, 500 years?  What if there is nothing more to that than just us – humans from the future? What if there is but in different way we anticipated?

We don’t really know, do we? But we definitely want to know. And that is why I am certain that sooner or later we going to find out.

Psychology { inkblot test } secret behind 10 inkblot cards-images

Is not what you see, it is how you react to the image.

The Rorschach Test, inkblot test or Psychodiagnostik designed by a Swiss psychologist named Hermann Rorschach [1885-1922] it is quite simple. There are 10 official inkblot cards.

The performer shows the cards one by one to the patient, asking what they originally saw and what made them think that while carefully watching every move the patient makes. The images themselves are only one component of the test, whose focus is the analysis of the perception of the images.
It can be described as projective-type of test. In psychology, a projective test is a personality test designed to let a person respond to ambiguous stimuli, presumably revealing hidden emotions and internal conflicts. This is different from an “objective test” in which responses are analyzed according to a universal standard (for example, a multiple choice exam). The responses to projective tests are content analyzed for meaning rather than being based on presuppositions about meaning, as is the case with objective tests.

The general theoretical position behind projective tests is that whenever a specific question is asked, the response will be consciously-formulated and socially determined. These responses do not reflect the respondent’s unconscious or implicit attitudes or motivations. The respondent’s deep-seated motivations may not be consciously recognized by the respondent or the respondent may not be able to verbally express them in the form demanded by the questioner. Advocates of projective tests stress that the ambiguity of the stimuli presented within the tests allow subjects to express thoughts that originate on a deeper level than tapped by explicit questions. Projective tests lost some of their popularity during the 1980s and 1990s in part because of the overall loss of popularity of the psychoanalytic method and theories. Despite this, they are still used quite frequently.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rorschach_test

View all 3 comments

Knoepfler

Of course, what a fantastic website and instructive posts, I will bookmark your site.Best Regards!

16 January 12 at 00:15

Shakira Thiery

What’s Happening i am new to this, I stumbled upon this I have discovered It positively useful and it has ...

16 January 12 at 03:05

Criticism implies judgment = There’s No Such Thing as Constructive Criticism

Would you mind if I gave you some feedback? -  What that actually means is “Would you mind if I gave you some negative feedback, wrapped in the guise of constructive criticism, whether you want it or not?

The problem with criticism is that it challenges our sense of value. Criticism implies judgment and we all recoil from feeling judged. As Daniel Goleman has noted, threats to our esteem in the eyes of others are so potent they can literally feel like threats to our very survival.

The conundrum is that feedback is necessary. It’s the primary means by which we learn and grow. So what’s the best way to deliver it in a way that it provides the greatest value — meaning the recipient truly absorbs and acts on it?

There are three key behaviors, I believe, and they’re each grounded in the recognition that what we say is often less important than how we say it.

1. The first mistake we often make is giving feedback when we are feeling that our own value is at risk. That’s a recipe for disaster, and it happens far more commonly than we think, or are aware.

If we’re feeling threatened or diminished by another person’s perceived shortcomings, providing “constructive criticism” becomes secondary to getting our value back. We’re more likely to be reactive, insensitive and even hurtful.

If it’s about us, it’s not truly about them. Any time we provide feedback with the goal of getting someone to better meet our needs, rather than being responsive to theirs, it’s unlikely to prompt the desired outcome.

A classic example is the parent who confuses his own worth with his child’s performance, and reacts to the child’s missteps with harshness and judgment rather than sensitivity and compassion.

2. The second mistake we make in giving feedback is failing to hold the other person’s value in the process. Even the most well-intentioned criticism will, more often than not, prompt us to feel our value is at risk, and under attack.

When that happens, the primal impulse is to defend ourselves. The more the person you are criticizing feels compelled to defend her value, the less capable she becomes of absorbing what she’s hearing.

I once had an employee who was highly competent and detail-driven, and rarely made mistakes. Partly this grew out of her fierce perfectionism and her outsize fear of the consequences of being wrong.

Her automatic instinct was to deny responsibility for any misstep. When I felt the need to bring one to her attention, I learned it was crucial to begin by reassuring her that I cared about her, and that I had continuing confidence in her abilities. Only then could she truly take in what I was saying.

When you’re inclined to offer specific feedback, pause and ask yourself first how you’d feel if someone gave you that feedback. If you would feel uncomfortable or defensive, assume anyone else would too.

3. The third mistake we make is to assume that that we’re right about whatever it is we’re inclined to say. Like lawyers, we take a series of facts and weave them together into a story that supports and justifies the case we’re seeking to make.

The problem is that our stories aren’t necessarily true. They’re simply one interpretation of the facts. It makes much more sense to think about offering feedback in a spirit of humble exploration rather than declaration, dialogue rather than monologue, curiosity rather than certainty. Humility is the recognition that we don’t know, even when we think we know. As Steven Covey says, “Seek first to understand.”

Ultimately, we’d be better off eliminating concepts like “feedback” and “constructive criticism” from our lexicons altogether. They’re polarizing, and mostly destructive. We need to think of these interchanges instead as opportunities for honest inquiry and genuine learning.

“Here’s the story I’m telling myself about what just happened,” we might say. “Have I got that right, or am I missing something?”

That’s exactly what I intend to say the next time I’m inclined to ask someone, “Would you mind if I gave you some feedback?”

source: http://blogs.hbr.org/schwartz/2011/11/theres-no-such-thing-as-constr.html

Also worth trying:
Take the suggestion onto yourself (“I was thinking about” instead of “you should do this”).