Dghk: I’m afraid you missed the entire point. The point being that both good and bad hit us all in life, it’s all a matter of you choose to handle it. Everyone seems to want to define “reality”, well, reality is what you make it. In any situation in life there are 3 options. 1. Change the other person. – well, you can try, and good luck with that. 2. You can change the situation. – Get a new job, move to different state/town/neighborhood…it’s not really dealing with anything, but it makes you feel better. At least until the same set of circumstances arise and you have to flee again to avoid it. And 3. You can change yourself. – This one you actually have control over. You figure out how to deal with that obnoxious coworker, or that ornry neighboor. And once you’ve done that and succeeded, you now have method with which to deal with any similar circumstances in the future.

But I think my favorite part was this: “don’t lose yourself in this pseudo-thinking and drive yourself insane in the process. gain the wisdom to understand the difference between what is possible and what is plausible, to reject the implausible as what it is and to focus your energy on a limited collection of tasks that are actually possible.”

OK. So first of all, define “plausible”. Your plausible, or mine? The Wright brothers flew, the light bulb was invented, and countless discoveries were made because people had the courage to believe that something could be done when everyone around them said it couldn’t.

“Whatever the mind of man can first conceive, and then believe, he can acheive.” Napoleon Hill

If you believe it cannot be done and you try anyway, you will prove yourself right everytime.

Good luck Dg.

And Tina, Thank you for an awesome article!!

1) positive thinking is declaring that a glass is half full.
2) negative thinking is declaring that a glass is half empty.
3) neutral thinking is noting that the amount of water in the glass is equal to 50% of the volume of the glass.

there’s a huge difference between the realist thinker and the negative thinker, as much of a difference as between the realist thinker and the positive thinker. it’s simply dishonest to fold realism into negativism.

what this article has done is present a false dichotomy between positive and negative thinking and then argue for the benefits of positive thinking by tearing down the straw man that it built up as it’s antagonist. this is practically the definition of dishonesty.

if you take a little bit of time to study the effects of trying to force yourself into positive thinking, you’ll realize that the number one consequence of this is depression and suicide. we need to experience the full range of expectation and emotion to be complete as humans, otherwise we become mentally unstable and behave antisocially.

don’t lose yourself in this pseudo-thinking and drive yourself insane in the process. gain the wisdom to understand the difference between what is possible and what is plausible, to reject the implausible as what it is and to focus your energy on a limited collection of tasks that are actually possible.

the world doesn’t need more positive thinking. it needs more rational thinking.

Always learn and develop
peace