Re untruth #3: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn put it well: “The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either - but right through every human heart…"
It is important not to take "anti-fragility" too far. Harsh consequences for failure makes people risk adverse. It's people who fail over and over who eventually succeed, but when they are too terribly damaged in the process, they stop trying to succeed, acting only to mitigate loss.
I disagree. It should eventually be pretty harsh. Being risk averse is natural so we need to habituate overcoming it. So, we start small and with the aid of an authority figure, we eventually work our way up to dealing with very painful tasks or news. This is why students who do mediocre in high school but had persevered to do moderately well actually end up being more successful more than people who excelled because they were intelligent. They've gone through the pain repeatedly. What we do need to be careful of is long-term trauma. Now, that's dangerous because our brain can't recover from it. If the trauma occurs repeatedly, our brain goes into PSTD. Also, if our entire lives becomes one long painful day, then our brains fall into depression.
@@morninglift1253 You start out start out disagreeing with me, but concede my point in the end. There always have to be standards along the way. I don't believe in participation trophies. Where I went to high school, dumb kids were passed for basic proficiency, while bright kids were required to complete mountains of homework. After I graduated, I found my friend almost universally failed and dropped out. Only one got his GED and finished college, but the rest took it to heart that they were losers. I think this is why they went to giving 50% for missing an assignment rather than the "0's" they gave my generation. After all, many teachers only grade a small fraction of the assignments they give you.
There need to be some caveats here. When I was 13 my junior high football coach was very abusive, and it wasn't just verbal. Practices were far too long, drills were frequently brutal, and if you made a mistake he'd often run up and kick you. Some people might take Haidt's advice too literally and just tell a kid to "tough it out" because "it's good for you." My parents saw that something was seriously wrong when I started having panic attacks. It was years before I gave them the raw details. . . they were horrified . . . but they supported me when I left the team. A few years later, in a different school and town, I again played football and had a great time. The discipline was well measured and not abusive. Other sports I did went well also. While I generally agree with Haidt's concept of "not fragile," there needs to be balance and perspective.
I agree here. My son was being badly bullied at college by one older, much larger lad, who had the entire class under his rule, picking on other students, disrupting lessons, even intimidating teachers. It was evident this guy was also something of a 'predator,' trying to manipulate younger, quieter lads. As parents, we had no idea what was going on, my son trying to ignore the situation and brush off this bully's advances - while we saw he was having trouble finishing assignments, forgot homework, couldn't concentrate on conversations, and became more reclusive and reactionary. We thought he was finding the course too challenging and reassured him that if he didn't pass his exams this year, it was no matter, there was always next year (thinking this would help reduce the evident stress) - until the day he couldn't take it any more, broke down right in front of us, and told us about this bully. We were horrified by the things he told us, and because the college wanted to play it down and brush it all under the carpet, we stepped up the action and brought in the police. The police, fortunately, did think the situation warranted action, the bully was expelled, the class was happy again, and my son's ability over the rest of the year picked up to such a point he got an A-grade. Had the bully stayed in that class, my son and some of his classmates most definitely would 'not' have been able to continue classes and/or gain the grades they finally did. Does anyone think that it's okay for parents or authorities to pay education fees - and then stand by and do nothing, letting some bully step in and waste it all for the sake of hoping their child learns a lesson in handling situations not even related to their course-work? I think not. Sometimes, you have to step in and be a parent - and that means standing by your kids and 'letting them observe' how situations are dealt with in a suitable manner, because all too many kids 'don't' know what to do and often take a heart-breaking way out (which was exactly what my son was considering! He felt he could not handle life because he didn't know how to handle 'this' particular breed of bully. He did not know who to tell, and I think it says something when he felt he couldn't approach his own teachers).
The problem I have with the "what doesn't kill you" expression is because so often it's applied as a way to invalidate experiences that are far beyond what is healthy or normal, and I've worked with many folks with ptsd who frequently have people dismiss or even belittle them precisely because of this expression.
@@andrewtorrens7790 Yes, I hate that response. Why the dichotomy? An ordeal that doesn't destroy you outright can still be damaging, which if repeated over time can really wear you down.
"What doesn't kill you leaves you broken" would be a more appropriate quote. The video should have mentioned a crucial point about the threshold when the damage received cannot be repaired and becomes a permanent trauma. And no, kids are not infragile 'terminators', although in some respect maybe more resilient they can also receive traumas just like any human beings. This video in the process of trying to dispell one 'untruth' has created another...
We really need to be teaching kids about our biases, like confirmation bias. I literally had never heard of or thought of these things until 3rd year university in economics classes of all things. This should be elementary level stuff.
Agreed. And it points out how those things concerned with economics are actually important to the core of human being. I think generally speaking, the study of economics is vastly undervalued and misunderstood.
Nah. We don't need to teach kids about abstract concepts like confirmation bias. We should take their perspective seriously and treat them like people from an early age (while still being responsible parents). We need to not shut them up when they question US but engage them in debates. That way, we teach them that adults can and should always be open to seeing new perspectives. "Confirmation bias" is just a term that will be meaningless to kids if they don't see it applied in the world. And: elementary school kids usually don't reflect on their own thoughts like that. They need adults to show them how it's done until they are mature enough to do it themselves.
Don't know we heard about it in later grades of school, not in depth but by first year of university I had a good understanding and that point was driven home multiple times during our quantitative and qualitative methology classes in university, that started in year one, as well as with basic courses on science theory. I don't know if it is really that good to expose kids too early to these concepts. In the end bias, be it confirmation bias, be it socio demographic bias, be it group bias develop naturally for certain reasons to actually function in group settings. So burdening them with too much rational thought might maybe stifle their social development and might not even really fully grasp, but might make them insecure - further questioning themselves at a time they already esentially disect themselves. They have time to learn about what a bias is in scientific terms later on, what we need to do is prepare them to be able to grasp such concepts and not discard them because they go against their gut feeling.
@@RandyMCPEmaster what are the chances for a person to mention all of the 3 untruths in a single short message and ensure he will not watch the video to fix his beliefs? Smell of the sarcasm should be strong enough here.
I always hated the first quote, and i still think its an oversimplification. people need to be challanged to grow, but severe trauma and abuse clearly dosent make you stronger.
Well, maybe it's because little girls just are not looking at it in the right way...they are making the mistake of trusting their feelings...that man that gives them a bad feeling because he held them down and touched them? The bad feeling doesn't mean something is wrong, it's all in their heads! Little girls just don't see the reality that it's good to get raped and molested,they are just listening to their stupid feelings. (Point number 2) This guy is doing nothing but advocating child abuse.
That really distorts his point. Therapists don't minimize the trauma of abuse. They help people clarify, remove themselves as causative agents, and move into healing. That is helping people change their reaction to trauma.
@@PaladinDusty I'm not playing mind games (like you are). I'm talking about offline reality. Reality is not up for debate. I don't need to prove what is real to you or anyone else. All you need in order to know reality is to be brutally HONEST with yourself. Most men can't do that. Can you?
Agreed, seems like inherent optimism bias and terror management theory will always help regardless of ideologies such as antinatalism based on consent.
I’ve never heard of the first one. I have heard of “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger”, which can be an untruth in some instances. Anyone with PTSD or life long afflictions after pushing themselves into a mental burnout can vouch for that.
There's also, "God only gives you what you can handle". My reply has often been (in addition to 'I'm an atheist'), "I wish he didn't think I was such a badass". I think we are often given more than we can handle. That's why psychiatrists are on-call in emergency departments.
Every colloquialism has exceptions. Yes, anything that will permanently damage you has not made you "stronger". But that is missing the point. The idea is by working through micro-stresses we can become resilient to a Macro stress. You lift 50 lbs over and over so that when you NEED it you can lift 100 lbs once.
Perhaps, PTSD and lifelong afflictions are basically in the category of something that "Kills" you. However, when faced with such terrible things you really have only 2 choices, continue to die each day or find your way to live again... not a simple choice nor a simple easy path. No judgments here just an observation from someone who has been there and done that.
Technically it is true, in that every event is caused by a prior event. For example, if you sneeze and crash your car, the reason you crashed your car was because you sneezed. But it's not true in the way it's usually understood, as in it's all part of some big meaningful plan.
It’s fun to be hearing this now as a woman in her early 40s. I can draw a line through my childhood that separates when my mom started hearing media panic about kids’ safety. I remember going off on my own in the mid-80s and even early 90s. Just hopping on my bike and being gone for the day. And sometimes I had fights with my friends and did dangerous things. Then in my teen years some fear set in and I got lectured about safety every time I was going to be home alone. My mom always wanted to do right. She was legit worried about something bad happening to us. But I have a lot of fun memories from when kids ran wild.
TL:DR version: 1- Some stresses are counterproductive, some are momentary, some are productive. 2- Your senses aren't fool proof, neither are your feelings, verify any experience you have. 3- Good and evil are subjective, causality isn't.
@@lloydgush What part of "he already surmised it" made you think I would bother to do it myself? Goddamn mongoloids everywhere. I'm so sick of this planet.
@@lloydgush So you don't know how to stop yourself from embarrassing yourself. Not surprising. Go on then, show us some more of your flaws. You clearly can't help yourself.
This is the statement people use to explain things they don't understand. It is a like the statement people use after someone dies : " He or she is in a better place now". Total nonsense the way it is used to elicit feelings of comfort where other feelings might be more appropriate. I do agree with the others who commented that everything actually does happen for a reason, implying of coarse that the reason has nothing to do with the supernatural or deity.
Yes! That untruth comes from the belief that there is some great plan controlling everyone and everything. There isn't. The truth is: Sh*t happens. Bad things can happen to good people, and good things can happen to bad people too. And who and what you are has nothing to do with it. If I am at home watching TV, and a piece of space junk crashes on my house and kills me, there is no reason for that. But stuff happens every day. Also, an added untruth to that example would be: She didn't deserve to die. What's that got to do with it? My death in this instance would not be punishment, it would just be my bad luck.
No, you shouldn't protect children from every wrong that can befall them. However, letting bullies continuously have their way with children who are more passive and not alpha by nature is a nearly sure-fire recipe for ending up with an adult who suffers from suicidal depression and needs therapy for the rest of their lives. Bullying is never OK, and it is always wrong to blame the victim. It does not "toughen them up". Parents should not be asking little Johnny what is wrong with them when they are bullied, or allow the school principal to think about a bullied child in terms of "what are we going to do about Johnny?" NO, the question should be, what are you going to do to take the bullies out of the school and send them to juvenile detention, where they belong?! They are the ones with a long-term mental problem - sociopathy.
Sometimes when the person is bullied and ignored long enough the consequences are casualties. If the children no longer have access to school counselors or guidance counselors and don't have parents who talk to their children, the children are left to their own devices and solutions.
One issue is that it's hard to define bullying. I thought I was bullied in junior high-in hindsight, I was just a pussy. Being teased or made fun of, even by people who didn't really like me, was ultimately good for me, even though I hated them at the time. But it also does seem obvious that there are extremes where bullying needs to be prevented, because it is legitimately harmful.
Protecting your kids and guiding them to learn from their wounds and injuries are two separate things. When kids are hurt, we not only need to make sure that they are not hurt again, but also should encourage them to learn from their experiences. I believe only in this way can we make sure kids are growing up both healthier and stronger.
yes this is good on a paper but you and i both know that no parents encourage their kids to learn from their experiences. its either overprotect or over criticized which add more trauma. this is true 2 years ago when you wrote your comment and it's still true now when I'm writing mine
I teach 9 10 & 11 year olds. It's so much easier to straight talk with them, than try and "teacher talk", or come up with a cliche answer because "they are too young to understand". We had a couple of Uber conservative Christian parents complain that kids swear too much. So we had a frank and open conversation about it, and together came up with the idea that swearing is ok in some situations, but that some people don't like it, even if we think it's ok, and that the people that don't like it aren't pussies etc. Some of my favourite films and songs have swearing in them, and it would be dishonest and disengenuous of me to say to them "swearing is bad". They got it, they don't need to be mollycoddled, the kids from the conservative families didn't go home swearing their heads off, the parents were satisfied that we as a school had the discussion about it. Same sort of deal as the "doesn't kill you make you stronger" some kids need to be exposed to certain stresses in order to grow, some, yet another stressor will just make them crumble.
I really like this view on children, they aren't babies and are more resilient than people give them credit. They are old enough to understand in most instances. I don't know why people see them as weak and naive, many aren't and they are physically destroying and creating their brain as they speak :) Sounds strong to me
You are so right! When my son was 4-5 or so, we explained that certain words, foods, drinks, actions were for grownups. He seem to accept that. At your 9-11 age group, your conversations sound like they were perfectly appropriate. I think it’s better to err on the side of too much information-most will tune out TMI & come back with questions when they are ready.
@@donHooligan Nah I thought about it, it doesn't always apply. Especially the context in which it is used, it's usually used to guilt people and creates and us vs them divide. I hate it and I think we should do away with it. If you wanna convince someone to get on your side you should get rid of these kinds of divisive statements. Some people may just have been ignorant of the issue and maybe they haven't considered different perspectives or thought about it in any depth. Hearing this kind of language is likely to turn them away. It did for me any time it has been used. Some people may just want a quiet life and that ok too as long as they're not actively harming people or get in the way of the solution to the issue.
@@justaguy6216 actively harming people...like buying food and clothing... you think that your support of slavery doesn't harm anyone, i take it...? you've been trained to destroy this planet. ...and you *ARE* part of the problem. i could almost guarantee it.
@@donHooligan What are you on about? Where tf did slavery come into this? Food and clothing? What? Besides my main issue with that statement is the use of it. It doesn't help the cause, it most likely hinders it.
@@justaguy6216 your ignorance as to how this relates to slavery is why you are part of the problem. every aspect of your life is dependent upon slavery, somewhere down the line. rather than live responsibly, you just play dumb.
It's a bit like the immune system. If a disease is not too destructive we can survive it and our immune system is now equipped to fight that disease the next time. But! If the disease is very harmful, (1) we might not survive it, or (2) it might do permanent damage such that we aren't really stronger afterwards.
Yea, the classic "what doesn't destroy you. . etc" has its limitations. It doesn't consider that something which doesn't destroy you may weaken you to where you could be ovetwhelmed by something you might otherwise have withstood.
Ikr. There are two sides of every coin. Just as you can't completely put kids in a bubble, you can't keep letting people slap them around and hope they develop leather skin. This guy is full of crap, justifying old commonsense reasoning in place of the new. The truth is that both extreme commonsense reasoning will destroy kids
@Dancing Fool Nicely said. I really take exception to Cliche Wisdom. Cliches can have substance, but too often people spew them out with no consideration for any depth. I really hate "do, or not. There is no 'try'". People spoon it out as if it's just sooo profound. It's a great thing to be able to do (right out of Dao De Ching), but you can't just suddenly DO something difficult, the only way there is through a lot of conscious, deliberate trying.
It’s a fine line between protecting and nurturing vs strengthening. By temperament, people tend to err on one side or the other. Very rarely do we hit it exactly in the middle. By temperament I’m a more empathetic and understanding person, so when someone feels traumatized I tend to err on the side of openness rather than tell them to “man up” or whatever nonsense.
The comment above is an excellent illustration of exactly the problem Haidt is exposing: prioritizing feeling over thinking. "Manning up" has gotten a very bad rap in recent decades, as have men and masculinity generally. Most of the time, to “man up” is exactly what's needed - to take a more stoic perspective - whether we’re talking about young men or young women. My wife grew up in a poor third world country, and now, living in a comfy California suburb, almost nothing phases her. Her parents had to figure out a way to survive, to simply eat on a daily basis, or it was curtains or the whole family, and my wife learned super-resilience from this. In many ways, she's a better man than I am. By contrast, I was in the first coddled generation, the Dr. Spock generation. We Boomers, the 1970’s “Me Generation,” basically had everything handed to us. We were the ones who finally had enough free time to invent first world problems like the need for "openness,” creating large group "awareness trainings," paying way too much attention to feelings over common sense and rationality. Now, what's needed is for more of us, particularly those of younger generations - for whom the importance of "openness" and "feelings" has become so greatly overblown - to "man up” more often (much more often). Yes, feelings matter - but not as much as rational thinking about actual reality (which is the basis of CBT, and Haidt's main point) - and not NEARLY as much as we've been taught in recent decades and have been overtly teaching young people in our schools and colleges since the "self esteem" education movement of the 1980s. That’s essentially what Haidt is saying, and I couldn’t agree with him more. Bravo, Professor Haidt!
@@whoshoe537 My main point was there is a balance between feminine and masculine love. In no way was I implying that feelings should be prioritized over thinking. I admitted my weakness in that I tend to err on the side of feminine love due to my temperament. But ideally, we should sit in the middle. Haidt might argue that this is impossible. In his book "the happiness hypothesis," he draws an analogy of the mind as the rider on an elephant. Our rational thinking is the rider, and our feelings are the elephant. The rider can nudge the elephant this way or that, but the one with the true power is the elephant. We cannot suffocate our feelings with "willpower" or whatever (this is what I meant by "man up." ). This is also encouraged with CBT. We do not suppress our feelings. That only creates more internal conflict. We acknowledge them. This is the only way to train them over time.
@@Dialogos1989 Thanks for clarifying. That's not my experience, however. Perhaps I disagree with Haidt on feelings being the "elephant." It's hard to separate feelings and thoughts completely, but my experience with the assumption that feelings were the primary energy, and therefore deserved the bulk of the attention when trying to improve one's mental health, the idea promoted by most psychotherapy and psychology since the 1970s, is that this idea is simply wrong, and doesn't work in practical terms very well at all. In fact, I’ve found, consistently, after years and years of ineffective “feelings centered” psychotherapy, that the “feelings first” model works quite poorly, and leads to much unnecessary frustration and angst. I believe this is because the model is fundamentally flawed. Only when I found out that irrational thoughts gave rise to unnecessary unhappy emotions did my own mental health actually begin to improve, and did I first begin to experience any sense of real control over my emotional life. There's no doubt that the basic insights of CBT simply work, clinically - and in my own personal experience, the "feelings exploration therapies" simply do not. For others, it might be different, but I really believe that "old therapies die hard," even very ineffective ones (like Freudian psychoanalysis) and that "feelings first" psychotherapy will be with us for some time, probably to our detriment. The driver/elephant analogy to thoughts/feelings is faulty on at least one dimension: there is a clear separation between driver and elephant, while there is no such clear separation between thoughts and feelings. It's very hard to tell which comes first. Which is the cause, and which is the effect. Very much a "chicken and egg" type thing. One thing is certain, however: thoughts are much easier to control than feelings. Feelings are almost impossible to actively control. They simply come, when they come. Similarly, thougths can be completely involuntary, appearing out of nowhere. But unlike feelings, thinking can be voluntary as well as involuntary; thoughts are different in that they can also be controlled in active (and, later, habitual/retrained) ways. Thoughts are like breathes: breathing happens naturally, and as long as one is alive, breathes will take place, no matter what. But breathing can also be deliberately controlled, often with dramatic and beneficial results. In my experience, trying to control feelings without trying to control thinking is fruitless. A waste of time. An expensive and frustrating waste of time, actually - if one is spending a great deal of money and time for psychotherapy with almost no benefit over a period of decades. Again, this is just my experience. Yours, of course, might be different.
@@lordeverybody872 oh please, "logic" is not flawless. some things NEED to be based on emotion, see that's a problem right there, that mentality that's as bullshit as simple, black and white "good vs. evil". It's not that simple and logic doesn't always win and it shouldn't always. Logic could mean letting your child die, but emotion will mean you will fight it with every ounce of your being as well you fucking should. don't be one of those. Vulcans are overrated idiots.
Thank you for reminding us of these key points. It does seem, though, that the speaker imagines that this is some new condition. I'm 70. Perhaps what has happened is that families are having far fewer children. I was the fourth of five, the third of three boys. You get lots of socialization in a family of that size. In public we were largely sheltered because of where we lived and went to school. The culture was monolithic, like the people. In my high school of 2,000 students, there were two or three black, four or five Jews, maybe a hundred kids with a Far East Asian origin, but about 15% Hispanic. These were bused off the campus every day to study at a vo-tech school, not in academic programs. Strangely, the people who were "offended" the most were advocates of war and racism when they were rebuffed. When a rabbi came to the school to speak about generosity of spirit and understanding, many parents went nuts. When a John Birch Society (alt-right) speaker was trounced at a Vietnam War debate by a retired Rear Admiral, parents complained that it was "one-sided." All of this extra sensitivity was bred into kids by their irrational parents. We shouldn't be surprised that their legacy lives on, if sometimes inverted. As the speaker seems to suggest, we have to use a great deal of introspection to address these matters.
I taught my kids to always listen to their 'gut' feelings, or intuition. If you have a really bad feeling about a person or situation, pay attention to it. Your subconscious may be warning you about something important.
Well, this is a myth that needs to be dispelled... How many of us minorities have wrongly had the cops called on us, because a white person had a bad "gut" feeling??
@@roninski3638 Intuition is a product of experience, not instincts. I would warn against *blindly* following instincs, as we are humans and should strive to be more conscious than animals.
This is especially true for Empaths and the school system beats it out of them. Empaths trusting their "instincts" should definitely be enhanced and promoted. It is part of their natural life gifts. It is really a read of the interior of the other person energy and all. So kids who score within the Diplomat section of the MBTI test need this promoted in their lives and learn to trust it. These reads aren't necessarily learned from experience but they get a better handle on what the reads mean with experience for sure. The AlexXx post below suggesting intuition is only a learned process is most likely a Sensor and not an Empath. Also The analyst Section of the MBTI tests are also empaths, with a slightly different twist because they are Thinkers Logic based whereas the Diplomats are feeing based. Diplomats and Analysts added together are only 25% of the population. School, work and other mediums of current society are not really set up for them at all. And they all score highest in the genius ranges for EQ and IQ and gifted classes etc. So if you have one of these kids you are blessed but also need to learn about what makes them tick because most all the diplomats are completely misunderstood by the majority of the population. And sometimes by themselves. LOL. One (of the many) key things I noticed growing up was that in school they would show pictures and short movies about adults who want to kidnap you using fake smiles etc. It was so odd to me because I could spot fake in an instant and so obviously that I wondered why they showed the film. I think this was 2nd grade. And also critiques the film in my head as they made many mistakes pointing this stuff out. But hey. Yes Gut Feelings are truer your stomach is your first brain and linked directly to the brain in your skull.
@@alexxx4434 we are animals. And while we should strive to be conscience of our actions and thoughts, our instincts still play a very important role in our survival, and we shouldn’t just ignore them and self-doubt.
I've always interpreted the "What doesn't kill you" caveat as encouragement for trying something, as in"if you don't try you'll never know". Obviously not to be used in situations that actually could result in death or severe injury, but situations where reluctance and hesitancy are the issue for not doing something....
Yeah, the video should have mentioned this important moment about the threshold when the damage received cannot be repaired and becomes a permanent trauma. And no, kids are not infragile 'terminators', they can also receive traumas just like any human beings. This video in the process of trying to dispell one untruth has created another untruth...
This IS the general meaning that seemingly blew right over Mr. Haidt's head in his search for an easy headline quote. Its not supposed to be taken literally as in "subject yourself to trauma to become stronger." But he does have a point about resilience. Its just that Resilience Theory doesn't have a lot of sexy colloquialisms to draw from.
@@alexxx4434 That isn't necessary because people with basic coping mechanisms (the point the video makes) will be able to differentiate the POINT from the EXTREME that the point isn't making.
@@HeadCannonPrime I don't know about the "general meaning", but it IS very much the meaning intended in the original quote. It comes from Nietzsche. That's also the how I've personally always heard it used (though I'm not American, maybe people tend to understand that quote differently in the US).
The growth mindset of carol dweck, the priority sorting of Mark Manson, and the overlap between psychology and mysticism of alan watts has done me a lot of good this year
Thanks for this. I think Critical Thinking is not being taught as a key life skill. This is a major deficiency. Great presentation on these bad, so called 'truths'.
Never destroy someones (psychological) defense mechanisms, unless you have something better to replace them with. This applies even to defences like 'denial', the great protector of addiction among other behaviours. To simply advocate exposing a child to exclusion etc., without a preparation of that child's personal society, is not going to make them anti-fragile, it will simply hurt them. The other thing to consider is that due to the combination of factors that have shaped a child's psychological mechanism, actions which might strengthen one child, may break another. Well meaning people, acting out of care and love for a child may use your suggestions wisely to that child's benefit, but many people will simply use them as an excuse to abuse someone they detest. Take a bully and thug, like Ben Shapiro and he will victimise the marginalised and weak and justify his words and actions by claiming he is just helping to make that person, or group stronger. I'm assuming it is still reasonable to characterise someone as a bully, without falling into a good-evil binary trap.
Unfortunately, you are part of the problem here. The biggest thing is that a child cannot create those mechanisms of they do not encounter any issues in the first place. And so while there is some merit to the idea of it breaking another, it is INCREDIBLY unlikely and even if it does the healing process from that means that they will likely not break in future. Secondly, it's a large misinterpretation to say it is in any way an avocation or can even be used as an avocation to bully and abuse others. As it's simply being willing to go into things that might be harmful not one to say it will be harmful. Final thing is calling Ben Shapiro a bully and claiming he will victimize the marginalized lmao. I genuinely don't have any idea where this comes from and seems like a narrow idea that tries to paint conservatives as those who want to bully others which is such a large distorting of the Temperment and values to really question if you've ever taken a minute to even think about what is advocated for.
Today , I see and hear people slamming "experts", slamming "education", slamming "the other guy" for "believing different than I do" . Many people do not believe in education, see no need to listen to anybody else , because "they don't know anything".
The phrase "What doesn't kill makes me stronger" was written by Nietzsche and it was not general observation from him but a more a way to approach life. The "me" is important in this sentence. "What doesn't kill - me - makes me stronger" Its a way of life, the only and best answer to suffering.
This has been a trend in humans to take something from somewhere else and pasting on something else just because sounded great and has no practical use, Like what happened to the greatest myth of all time that we can only use 10% of our brain and debunked by the scientist time to time.
@Jan Andhisfiets If this approach works for you, wonderful. But it is neither the only nor the best approach to suffering. The fact is that people can experience suffering that actually damages the body and the brain, causing physical and mental illness and injury. The entire field of epigenetics studies, among other things, how this happens and to what degree. It's the same with "everything happens for a reason" which many people have observed in their lives; it works up to a point but when suffering is meaningless and destructive, usually brought on by the dysfunction or evil in others, this also becomes false. The more encompassing response to suffering is the Buddhist philosophy of letting go of desires and attachment to self so one no longer experiences suffering as suffering. This doesn't break down on any scale but is not easily achieved. "Only and best" approach reveals that you haven't experienced the most extreme stress, for which I am very happy. I hope you never do.
@@gmkbelanger I disagree with the Buddhist idea of letting go of desires. I like to let go of demands. The difference is this: I can desire something and be willing not to have it. If I don't demand to have it, I don't become agonized over not getting it. But I like to pursue desires. And to that exact point: I like to point out my view to you, and I desire that you come to see the reason of it. But I want to steer clear of demanding that you agree with me. You're free to see it the way you'd like. Also..."That which does not kill me makes me stronger." is incorrect. Nothing makes me stronger but me. If something doesn't kill me, it's up to me to make myself stronger by it, or at least not be bothered by it. That, I can do.
The major problems "big thinkers" identify in the current generations of children and young adults are limited to observations of young people in their class and community. There are lots of great, hardworking young adults in my lower and middle class group of friends. They have solid values and lean toward critical thinking when they aren't consumed by their bad situations.
You are absolutely right, and he knows it: the constraints of the format prevented him from saying that, but in most long-form video featuring him he states that most young people are just fine, but there is a minority of troubled young people big enough to be a serious problem, and not just in the "elites".
The adage “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” is not meant as a truth, but a coping mechanism like “ sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me”
There are some instances where trusting your feelings is essential. Like, for example, when all your instincts tell you that you're in the wrong position at work, you probably are. If you see a guy who just gives you the creeps all over, then you could be wrong about them -- it's true. But it's better to avoid them and perhaps risk offending them a bit than it is to end up naked in a shallow grave.
The bone analogy is probably a good one. Some amount of stress is good and helps to keep the system in health, but if it breaks it's going to take a while to heal from the damage and the whole system may experience long term adverse effects.
I feel like the first one really should be “some damage is permanent and can’t make you stronger, other damage is strengthening”. Underexposing kids can undermine their confidence and independence, but some things will really mess kids up long term. The same applies to adults. Some hardship teaches you that you are capable of working through hardship or teaches you the skills needed to work through various struggles, while others can leave you with phobias, paranoia, or even full blown ptsd. There is a balance that has to be struck here.
Wow, quote 1 caused a commotion. I think we need to teach our children that if troubles find you, you DO have the ability to overcome it. We need a "solution" based thinking, but we're stuck on "problem" based thinking. Of course we're going to wallow in our traumas when the rest of the world doesn't want you to move on. Time to start thinking solutions than just what's the problem, because we can't control every hurtful thing that happens to us, we can only react to it
If you think you are damaged, question that thought. If you are upset, get in touch with your emotion and see where it is really coming from.. If you stay still a bit, it usually dissolves. If the upset keeps coming back, look deeper.. Increased awareness will point out a way out in time..
I most especially hate how Instagram therapists are tuning people sooo much into their feelings to such a point you’re like - wait a minute - thats a malignant form of canceling people 🤔🤔
Yup. I got cancelled by dozens because of dozens of 'easy lies to swallow'. Later, when everyone found out that it was all lies... it's not like anyone apologized, hahahaha. The ones which owed me favors and money probably just forgot about all of it and posted more selfies. 😂🤣😂
Me too, soo sleepy, I nod off. Boomers are so fragile. I have a list of 3 things we should tell all boomers, especially professors. 1. Your generation failed to make the world any better based on your measurable results. You have no moral authority to talk about other generations. 2. Neoliberalism sucks. 3. Your feelings are just as objective as mine.
I didn’t know “always trust your feelings” was even a thing, I had always heard the saying “trust your gut” or “trust your intuition” which to me means something very different. It means to trust that primitive side of the brain to alert you to danger, I think that it is much better equipped to do so. I’ve even heard a serial killer talk about this, that people would get “spooked” and just shake it off right before he would attack them. Trust your gut is a very important thing to pass on to your kids in my opinion especially since kids can be so prone to second guessing themselves. The original saying is about trusting your instincts which can provoke emotions, not the other way around.
He isn't suggesting to not trust your gut/feelings. Rather not to use them to objectively determine something. For example, say you encounter some girl in the bar, and you feel like she isn't the most likable person. You'd keep that in mind, but you wouldn't solely use that to determine whether shes good or not. Even if you felt like somebody was about to murder you, you don't use that to objectively determine if thats the case, your brain just decides its better to not take the risk of dying in that case. Hopefully i worded that well.
That would make sense if intuition and feelings were interchangeable words that mean the same thing but they don’t. Feelings are emotions created by neuropeptides in the brain and is released in body, you can even become addicted to these hormones so they are a somewhat unreliable yet powerful tool. Whereas guts is about your bodies instincts receiving signals from its environment that are so subtle that consciously you may not recognize the them but your primitive brain and body is still attune and aware. When this is happening your body will then alert you by releasing the neuropeptids that create emotions like fear, unease, tension and similar so you can face whatever it is. If someone trust their gut, that’s good. And if someone is running around trusting all their emotions that is nuts… it is misrepresenting the intention of the original saying and making it a dumb saying that no one should do, so yeah don’t do that. The logic feels redundant, unhelpful(like get people killed level of unhelpful) and circular.
He is talking about "belief perserverance" in which people resist evidence or logical argument which discomforts their feelings, or "lived experience" or "personal truths". The idea that feelings are unquestionable is what he is challenging.
I always thought "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" means that if I was in a fight club or something that pushes my body to its limits and I don't die... I get stronger... I have never thought about it in the way Jonathan expressing it.
"You can be anything you want to be when you grow up." While technically true I think this is usually very bad advice/guidance to give children. Let me assure you that you do not want me to do your corporation's taxes for you. Could I study to be a CPA? Yes. Would I have to study 5 times as hard as someone else that has a natural proclivity for understanding huge volumes of complex, sometimes contradictory, tax code and how those codes apply to your specific business? Yes. I would have to study that much harder and it would take me much longer to do so. Even then I still wouldn't have the reflexive instincts that would yield the best possible positive outcomes as compared to the people who have inherent capabilities in this category of skill set. When my kids have asked me what my thoughts are on a future vocation I always say that it should be something you love to do AND that you are naturally good at. If it is only something that you love to do but don't have a natural inclination for then consider making that your hobby but make the way that you earn your living something that you are naturally adept at.
Thanks for your last paragraph. I did not distinguish between loving something and being naturally good at it. I falsely assumed the two were highly correlated.
The biggest danger of good vs evil thinking. Is that when one defines oneself as good, one tends to automatically see one's own actions as good. After all why would a good person do something bad.
" Everyone is an expert on something. " " You can be anything you want, and you will probably wind up an asshole. " " The same mind that screws up shit, has to clean up the mess. " " No matter how much you research an idea, confirm, test, or indoctrinate an idea, you will find that someone who thinks you're wrong. "
these sound good on the surface but if the first three are definitely not true and don't hold up in real life experiences. the fourth one might actually be true but would be difficult to prove as true.
Kids are not born today as little princes and princesses. They shouldn't be told they are. Other people have a right to say what they believe in without being seen as enemies to these to these little royalty. They don't need protection from other viewpoints, they need to learn to interact and relate to others and analyse those differences. Life is not black or white, good or evil. Life like water always seems to find a new level that works for it. Life is symbiotic not a competition that leads just one winner. That's a false narrative.
The best rulers know they are servants of the people. The king and the horse groomer are not separate and of different castes the king just serves the kingdom as the horse groomer serves his horse. That is why I only seek to rule myself. But be as helpful to others as I can. *_Peace if we can keep it_*
#1 "Kids are anti-fragile", yes, except for myriad ways in which they aren't. Trauma causes long-lasting harm, stressors are cumulative, abuse can be permanent. Bullying is a frequent causal predictor of self-harm including suicide. So sure, don't try to make their lives sterile and challenge-free, but also don't expose them to lead, cholera, poverty, malnutrition, abuse, bullying, etc. Kids aren't wine glasses, but they aren't plastic cups either, and nor are they entirely like immune systems or bones.
He was talking about the harm parents do when treating their kids as fragile. And what idiot would expose their kids to lead, cholera, etc? If you're going to try and argue against his propositions at least make your arguement realistic and centre it on what he actually said.
@@thomasdequincey5811 I think the criticism here is that the video is very vague, and many forms of bullying and mental abuse can end up being as harmful as lead or cholera in the long run. Plus, plenty of parents currently are becoming anti-vaxers, so they are exposing their kids to diseases as bad as or worse than cholera intentionally, so the answer to your question is, more than you would think. If you just take the video at face value, it proposes that kids need to be exposed to danger and harm to build up a thick skin, but doesn't put any limits on it, when we know that childhood experiences can lead to life long trauma and injury.
Instead of just teaching kids that bullying is bad (which obviously most bullies don't listen to), we should also be teaching children how to deal with bullies.
This idea of anti-fragility (as opposed to fragility and resilience) is very interesting. But I wonder what the thresholds are. At what point does something go from being antifragile to fragile? Where is the breaking point? How do you optimize the dose of adversity to develop antifragility without breaking? Is this why bullying exists - to inoculate us against larger adversities? Interesting.
@@thescowlingschnauzer you or your children are not appointed by god or nature to be fragile or antifragile. You and them will become one or the other due to YOUR choices. If you keep living in fear like this, you'll always see yourself (or your children) as fragile, and nothing will ever have the chance to show you you're wrong. Only facing adversity we become antifragile. Ffs listen again to the video, he basically said all this
What doesnt kill you might make you 'stronger' in some sense, but a lot of people become bitter, cynical, stressed and depressed as a result of challenging life events. Maxims like this arent as wise as they appear and offer no practical help. If you want to help people you need to offer skills and solutions, on a personal _and_ societal/poltical level.
I see the case that you're making, but I think the point of this Maxim is to embrace a mindset that tries to help you learn from your failures and challenges. You're right, just because something bad in your life happens it doesn't mean that you become stronger for it by default. The point here though, is that In order to become stronger you need to be introspective about what went wrong and make sure to guard against it in the future. The world's most successful people have all experienced a myriad of failures in life; the difference between them and and those who become cynical is all about mindset. If you believe that adversity builds strength, then every failure can be a learning opportunity, and I think what he's saying is that this is the mindset we should be teaching kids. It's an important clarification to an otherwise oversimplified maxim
You completely missed his point that CHILDREN need to be challenged more and allowed to deal with the world as it and the consequences of their own actions, rather thsn shielded from these things, in order to build the necessary tough skin and emotions coping mechanisms to more successfully masssge life as an adult without becoming depresses, anxious, bitter or resentful.
@@reivardi5 ..... and children should be tought those solutions you speak of... many, they will inherently learn on their own through the process of not being told the untruths or being shielded from bad things.
Basically everyone I know is worse, not better, off for their hardships and we see this in the large statistics too. Just see attachment styles or the results of those who grow up in bad neighborhoods. This is usually just an excuse to wash your hands of helping another and only serves to hurt the growth of both victim and abuser.
Everything happens as random chaos, afterward we rationalize the circumstance and we then develope a reasonable explanation. If other wise we could predict the conclusion of every event. There always is some X factor hidden in any complex event that can change the direction of any action.
Here is my more complete version of these 3 psychological truths: 1. What does´nt kill you just has not killed you, so you have the chance to become stronger depending on how you (can) deal with it. Antifragility is a matter of how you respond and adapt(mostly unconsciously) to what happens to you. Here´s the trick: That adaption can go either way so what doesn´t kill you can also cause you to maladapt (like in the case of PTSD) or it can damage you (brain damage for example). In any case what happens to you will change you in some way or another and will probably have all sorts of undected secondary effects. And what adaptions happen is also limited by the resources available for you to adapt (like a secure attachment base for little children). But these changes provoked or elicited by stress don´t necessarily need said stress as a prerequirement, and even if they do you don´t have to be just thrown into stress you can (and imho should) actually use it to deliberately and systematically culivate yourself. 2. Trust your feeling but don´t trust them blindly. Feelings are not a problem so lang as you are aware and anticipating of where they are leading you. It´s not like you have to shut your feelings down in order to think more clearly . Feelings are actually quite helpfull for thought so long as you engage with the thoughts and hunches they present you. Feelings can also be grounded in experience and expertise and not just in primitive emotional reactions. If that is the case, respect those feelings that reflect your accumulated wisdom. 3. Life is a battle between people, although this battle is influenced by how evil/good the participants are it is very often not caused by that and sometimes influenced by it in paradoxiacal ways. We both have the potential for good and evil acts in us, but we don´t all lead equally good/evil lifes. Some people are more or less disposed to good or evil and some people repeatedly think and act evil. And we can fairly easily approximate the good/evil in someone´s character based on their characteristics in this regard (Of course we always have to consider context!) There is no reason here to obfuscate that fact. Some people are just evil, which means they are more likely to do evil things because they are disposed to do those thing or have repeatedly done them in the past (like deliberately harming others for personal gain or just out of sadism). And of course some people don´t just do evil they want evil.
This 100%! We should be teaching children how to deal with unpleasantness, not removing the source of unpleasant interactions. I was not given the tools I needed to protect myself as I was forming, hence I had to learn much later in life on my own. Adults get overly involved with children’s interactions, stifling the learning process. I believe we have overcompensated for a few negative experiences. All beings need to understand how to process disappointment, others not liking them, being picked on and legitimate or illegitimate criticism.
Read the book, THE CODDLING OF THE AMERICAN MIND, and don’t fall into the trap many of the commentators on this video do of thinking they can speak for Haidt and co-author Greg Lukianoff, both far more knowledgeable and nuanced than those trying to label the “targets” with some simplistic left-right bull.
Everyone partly good and bad, so it's important that I educate people who are ideologically wrong so that they can align themselves to my own belief system. I am objectively correct and have nothing left to learn.
@@violet-trash It's more like, "As a psychologist, it is my job to help people learn to be mentally healthy, so I will write books/ make videos to try and make them aware of important psychological principles.
We should try not to be fragile. But every _real_ bully in America says "whatever doesn't kill you, makes you stronger", as they attack. And bullying, not just fragility, is a real problem. Sadists ARE getting worse.
What??? Bullies don't say (or think) that as they attack. They aren't trying to make you stronger, they're trying not to feel so weak themselves. I think you're giving the bullies too much credit.
@@76JStucki They don't say it as they attack. They say it to society, before and after attacks, to divert blame from bullies to the victims, or to make bullying seem like a Darwinian good, which they have tricked foolish people into believing is good. That saying basically makes bullying the rule of society: gotta have bullying and cruelty to make us "strong", right? "Bloody in tooth and claw." I don't agree with it; I think it is diabolical.
One of the worst things to tell a child (even if you mean well) is "You did your best" after a child doesn't do well. This is the equivalent of "you failed and I expected failure from you, your best will always be a failure". A better way is to say something like "ok, you came last/didn't pass etc but are capable of doing better if you really want to. If you'd rather do something else that's fine but I don't believe for one second that you can't improve". I believe this attitude is why my oldest son, at the age of 16, was chosen by a bunch of adult climbers with an average of 20 years experience of climbing to take the lead on "le pantere rose" a 130 m (400ft) cliff in southern France. His brothers are doing just as well in their own fields too. My second is a 5'8" basketball player.
Just this morning my niece told me about her baby getting teeth. I thought, pain when we didn’t do anything. is introduced. Of course, most do not consciously remember teething but the concept is introduced on a deeply unconscious level which sends out ‘connections’ when pain hurts us. It is only through an adult who has critical thinking skills and understanding educating kids, do kids have a chance of real balance. I see so many generations sharing dysfunctional attitudes. I moved out of such tribal thinking. My kids are doing so much better than i. I have hope my grandchild can do even better. 💓
I object to talking about "kids" in a general sense as this. WHAT AGE OF CHILD ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? The younger the child, the less resilient they are. It is wrong to try to toughen up an infant. You have to be age specific in order to be age appropriate.
This speaker has an interesting, balanced view. I want to hear more from him. As for #2, true, reality and one's perception of it sometimes differ, but I think as you get older and gain more experience, your "gut" instinct gets right more and more often and should definitely be considered when making decisions.
Kids need to face unpleasentness and conflicts to become better people, but they also need a place where they feel safe and loved, only if they have someone that they can trust and that can help them understand those unpleasentness and conflicts they will come out stronger from them, if they don't have such a figure and a safe place those things will harm them
i think there are happy balances to all these points. we dont want to coddle our kids every time they scratch their knee. but we do want to prevent them from breaking their arm. people should examine the situation, and not just trust their feelings. but intuition plays a helpful role in a person's life. it if quacks like a duck... and some people are definitely more "evil" than other people. so we want to help kids get the wisdom to be able to discern for themselves which people to move towards, and which ones to avoid.
I learned a lot from this... interestingly, 99% of what I learned was from the comments. Lesson learned: Don't judge the learning from the contents of the video.
One thing, a lot of people use the first point as an excuse for neglect or abuse, so it’s a fine balance you have to strike, to support and encourage but not baby.
I stand a lot by the first quote. While I will agree that abuse is very damaging and can cut someone's lifespan by a certain amount of time (either by actual damage to the brain/body or suicide), I think the opposite is extremely damaging as well (protecting our children, teenagers and young adults to the point they have the parents' perception of a perfect life), considering that the shock of a very unnurturing and sometimes brutal reality can be so bad it causes depression and make someone feel like their entire life was a lie. I think it applies well to my case, where I was very sheltered and barely went out or anything. I had the occasional blunder and friendship and even a high time, but I feel like I matured the fastest after being truly exposed to cruel reality from age 16 onwards. But at the same time, the effects of overprotection and parents that still saw me as a child and treated me as such with control methods and not trusting me as much nearly drove me to suicide. Only thing that saved me? One time it was my dog and the rest were online friends/lovers I cared about. But I really just wanted to find a better situation where I didn't feel as sheltered. I'm managing to improve but life still is difficult at times. I think in the end, finding a balance is the most helpful thing, and I do believe that the three guidelines shown in the video can go a long way to create mature adults in the future that - hell knows, maybe will even change society permanently.
@@huckaf Schools are underfunded, teachers pay is often below the rates needed to be comfortable in the areas they teach, and promised raises from the plan when they were hired based on time spent teaching, to account for experience, are frozen when the government doesn't provide funding. Not to mention that teachers often have to buy supplies with their paycheck, instead of it being provided by the school. Building off that note, many schools simply lack the funding to hire people for every position they are supposed to fill or to provided the resources to help students really learn. Basically, people keep telling us how the school system needs to change, or a magic cure all for what new idea should be the core of out teaching programs, but the first and simplest thing we can do is to adhere to the age old wisdom of "you get what you pay for" and start paying more then the minimum we can get away with for educating the youth. Extra: Also, I thing there are plenty of things wrong with the way the education system is run from the systematic standpoint, but thats another matter entirely.
What I learned with this video: The actual untruths: 1- Exactly zero of any damage a person can suffer mentally or phisically is permanet. Breaking a bone makes it stronger if it heals, and weaker if it's not held in place while healing. If it heals distorted, it will stay distorted and breaking a bone badly make it distorted forever. These are facts. Period. 2- A strong feeling is objectively true. Nobody but religious peeps teaches that to younglings. Analysis of social constructs tell us what society actually is and it's not just a strong feeling. Depression's cure is not to break out of beliefs or "improve the thinking", depressive people knows exactly in what situation they are. What is irrational are the constant imbalances. Period 3- People are either good or bad. We all are gray. Some lack some white. Some lack some black. Others are undistinguishable from a extreme. We are not wired for warfare, we are wired to care for the clan only, and making us all realize we are one big clan called humanity is the purpuse of encouraging diversity. Colleges do not teach that the highers are bad and lowers are good, but courses on politics, economy or society may teach about the -steps- walls the lowers need to deal with, some of which were put there by some of the highers. Period. Bonus: we all learned to deal with offensiveness at young age. Even the protected kids. We either don't care, pretend to not care, care too much, care as much as needed or call for help if we can't deal with it. And there are bs out there not even you can deal with, requiring help or a form of coping untill it's gone. Period I didn't read as many books about social stuff and can't name the main idea of many authors, but I know way more about real life than a studied old guy, it seems
Most excellent. I have been arguing these points for years with my family. They just call me an asshole and/or cold. I will share this video with them. Thank you. (Christoph bows graciously)
I agree with your family. I went to Catholic boarding school, led by Benedictine monks. There, I got all the anti-fragility training one could ask for, if you catch my drift. I suggest you learn a little empathy, before you espouse Jonathan Haidt's cruel neoliberal propaganda.
"We must always fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil that we must fear the most, and that is the indifference of good men." - Boondock Saints Such a true quote.
When my son was being bullied at school we taught him strategies to stick-up for himself rather than informing his class teacher. The bullying eventually stopped (a bully actually wants to be stopped). There is too much emphasis on the victim rather than the bully. Find out more about the bully, why is he/she like this? Often they are sad lonely individuals craving attention.
If they're craving attention, why do they target the one child whose different?? Why don't they bully at random? Usually, bullies are children who are raised to be bigoted, violent, and arrogant.
I used to stop bullies myself as a kid -- typically with a solid object to the face. They didn't seem to appreciate it. 🤕 What wacky book did you get that tidbit from?
There's a difference between exposing your kids to the outside world vs oppressing kids with homework to force them to be obedient workers who don't think for themselves. The 2nd one doesn't make kids stronger, it makes them grow up and perpetuate the world's problems. This is why I don't like generalized advice. It could be helpful or harmful depending on the interperetation.
Homework is oppressing kids? It forces them to be obedient workers who don't think? Wow...let me tell you something, princess: I'm 51 and one of my biggest regrets was not doing homework in school. Sure...I was smart enough to get away with not doing homework and still pass - but I wasn't smart enough to develop any marketable skills without doing homework. You can't get good at something without practice and homework is just that. But hey, you don't have to be an "obedient worker." You can just be a hippy loser and sponge off of people who actually give a damn. Or maybe you can flip burgers for a living. Won't that be nice?
@@DesertHomesteader "Wow...let me tell you something, princess" - You might get a better reception if you refrained from condescension and personal attacks. No need to try to insult people because they have differing views. Perhaps you should work on logical arguments.
@TheGerm24 - First, I don't really care about getting a better reception and I didn't ask for your help - but thanks for riding in on your high horse to save me. Second, everything I wrote is word-for-word what I would tell my own child or grandchild if they came to me spouting that garbage. Old people get to condescend to young people because they make stupid statements devoid of any wisdom. Welcome to the real world, snowflake.
It’s not the homework’s fault. Modern education is not really about learning or sparking interest in some subject for further development or better understanding. Modern education is all about getting an “A” or similar passing grade and moving on to the next subject.
Most of my learning as an adult has been unlearning the lies of childhood. It’s really shocking what people just go along with and perpetuate because of the heard mentality and tradition . If people don’t get the time to stop and think about things like theology , philosophy, psychology….the hows and whys of life , to really ponder them for themselves and not just take someone else’s quick answer , if they don’t get the time to think and question then it is really hard to unlearn lies when you’re a stressed piece of the system so for many it’s simply easier to live the lie …..many willingly choose ignorance mistaking it for bliss.
knowing the evil we are all capable of committing is the first step in doing good, not evil... and it's not an easy thing to see. That's why the concepts of seeking redemption/forgiveness and giving redemption/forgiveness are the most powerful of all human qualities (in my opinion).
He makes a claim that some how some harassment as a child will make you develop better social skills. That is total nonsense. Bullying among children in school does nothing good. It ruins lives.
This. People act like because it’s between children, bullying can’t be that bad. Honestly, people need to drop the “bullying” label and call it what it is, harassment and abuse. Some types of “bullying” could get an adult months in prison, but when it’s with kids suddenly even telling the perpetrators to stop is “coddling” the victim, and the victim just needs to “learn how to stand up for themselves”
A pleasant surprise coming from this channel. The "All people are good and bad" ideology however is only a technicality. It's mainly for those ignorant enough to think they're good and everyone against them is bad. However, this isn't a mindset to hold onto in the long run. Everyone isn't equal in morality, and it's not right to drag great people down for their few vices or excuse terrible people for their minor positives. Acknowledge all aspects, just don't give them all the same weigh.
Abstractly, I would say that your idea about weighting peoples behaviour works but only after people starting paying attention to the individual and not simply the categories they fall into e.g. male / female, black / white, gay / straight, left / right. I agree though that once you start paying attention to the individual person you can start to make judgements about them and even rank order them in your perceived list(s) of *insert value(s) here*. Unfortunately, people often rank other people before they get to know them. Stereotyping to a large degree helps us make faster decisions based on past experiences / impressions, which is necessary. We can never fully interpret all available information so we must simplify it. This can be wrong or skewed based on bias we have but be a fair and just judgement or feeling from the perspective of the individual and their experience. I think you are right that ignorant people generally rely on this stereotyping more than more intelligent, but maybe we are actually just saying ignorant people 'are those' who stereotype more?
Questions to ask yourself. 1. Is this person prone to harm others? 2. Is this person prone to think it is ok to take others property with out permission or compensation? There may be more or better questions but this is a good start. *_Peace if we can keep it_*
You should probably rewatch this video with the sound ON. You totally missed the point of his third idea. The good vs bad concept isn't an ideology, it's an evolutionary necessity. Your entire point is invalid. "Who are we humans? What is our species? We evolved from small scale societies locked in struggle with other small scale societies. Human nature is tailored for intergroup conflict and tribal warfare..." He goes on to claim, clearly contradicting himself, that we transcended this evolutionary necessity, but then he goes on to say that we reinstitute it in sports and schooling. We didn't transcended shit. Our in group vs out group mentality is as hardwired as is the imperative to eat and procreate.
I've never heard of any of these "untruths." But I will say, "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger," is a terrible thing to say. Some practices simply ought to be ended. It's one thing to suffer consequences for your actions, like breaking a bone if you're not careful, or getting sick with a disease, but you cannot equate that to something like being the victim of bullying. It's not the same thing because the mind doesn't behave like your bones or immune system. Victims of bullying aren't inherently tougher than kids who aren't bullied. They're more likely to become depressed, and more likely to react violently when provoked. Bullies, on the other hand, become enabled and narcissistic. The Columbine shooters were bullies and believed themselves to be better than everyone else. Bullying is something that should be discouraged and prevented entirely, it doesn't make anyone stronger.
3) Depends where on the planet you are. Here in Ireland, most people eventually become a home owner in their lifetime. We currently have a home ownership rate of 77.3
the third option is untrue. it depends on where you live. we are a normal family in he Netherlands. no millionaires, normal jobs. in 10 years, if we don't die that is, our house is ours.
I thought i would never find a video that explains the troubles of a human and how they make situations worse for themselves... finally can send this to the people that deal with self-conflictions so that i don’t have to explain it. Humans are sensitive, immature organisms that do not know how to look at their problems correctly.
Ben Simpson brother i‘m swimming trust me. I’m gracious that i don’t have problems to deal with unlike the people that do. So that’s why i give this style of advice out, because this video states true points. Emotional support is just the icing on the cake. You need a hearty base to support the icing. So realistic support (this video) is the best advice to give out.
Great video! This is so important to understand. if you can figure out how to take a step back and control your emotions you'll have a way easier time. I'm in the process of learning this but already people keep telling me they appreciate that i don't get mad at them or i apologize if i was mad/unfair to them. Sometimes when you're in a fight or a discussion you should really ask yourself : am i angry because of a different thing right now? is this fight about the topic itself or is it something personal between me and the other person? or in other words do i just want to win a fight to feel good and make the other person feel bad? It's funny to see how people react if you apologize mid fight. they're like "wait..you were supposed to say something mean. i'm in fight mode. what am i supposed to do with all this rage now? " :D but it's worth it
Actually, there are plenty of studies on the long lasting effects of bullying at school. Kids immune systems get stronger with filth if they are well nourished and healthy. And not small newborns. Not if they are in chemotherapy either. Likewise, their psyche needs to be healthy and grown a bit in order to withstand bullying and other social challenges. Instead, a lot of kid's brains usually get absurd amounts of screen time, broken families, mentally ill caretakers, very little contact with nature and the outdoors, poor nutrition, little exercise... And we want those brains to be antifragile. This man lives in fantasy land.
Number 4: our society is normal, and a good job will help you. In reality our eco system is dying and politics and corporations lie to you, because they won't face the truth nor their crimes making matters worse.
KootFloris It depends on what you mean by "good job." The best money comes from finding a new way to appeal to the most self-indulgence. The truly good jobs, then, really don't pay that well, but they do probably provide purpose and meaning. That kind of job helps everyone.
@@PoofyKittyPants I think he means that one of our big lies is that our society is normal for humans. Our society is a disaster for humans. It has been for about 12,000 years. We evolved as foragers living in small tribes. Our brains and bodies are still designed for that kind of life, not for the way we live today.
@@incognitotorpedo42 what is normal is suffering and death. Society holds that at bay. If you think foraging for food sounds like fun go walk into the woods and don't come back for a month.
The biggest lie we tell children - actually, we show it to them by protecting them, even if we never tell them explicitly - is the illusion that the world were a safe place.
Re untruth #3: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn put it well: “The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either - but right through every human heart…"
It is important not to take "anti-fragility" too far. Harsh consequences for failure makes people risk adverse. It's people who fail over and over who eventually succeed, but when they are too terribly damaged in the process, they stop trying to succeed, acting only to mitigate loss.
I disagree. It should eventually be pretty harsh. Being risk averse is natural so we need to habituate overcoming it. So, we start small and with the aid of an authority figure, we eventually work our way up to dealing with very painful tasks or news. This is why students who do mediocre in high school but had persevered to do moderately well actually end up being more successful more than people who excelled because they were intelligent. They've gone through the pain repeatedly.
What we do need to be careful of is long-term trauma. Now, that's dangerous because our brain can't recover from it. If the trauma occurs repeatedly, our brain goes into PSTD. Also, if our entire lives becomes one long painful day, then our brains fall into depression.
@@morninglift1253 You start out start out disagreeing with me, but concede my point in the end. There always have to be standards along the way. I don't believe in participation trophies. Where I went to high school, dumb kids were passed for basic proficiency, while bright kids were required to complete mountains of homework. After I graduated, I found my friend almost universally failed and dropped out. Only one got his GED and finished college, but the rest took it to heart that they were losers. I think this is why they went to giving 50% for missing an assignment rather than the "0's" they gave my generation. After all, many teachers only grade a small fraction of the assignments they give you.
That is a legitimate concern. Everything needs balance. Nothing is black and white, (except actual black and white)
There need to be some caveats here. When I was 13 my junior high football coach was very abusive, and it wasn't just verbal. Practices were far too long, drills were frequently brutal, and if you made a mistake he'd often run up and kick you.
Some people might take Haidt's advice too literally and just tell a kid to "tough it out" because "it's good for you."
My parents saw that something was seriously wrong when I started having panic attacks. It was years before I gave them the raw details. . . they were horrified . . . but they supported me when I left the team.
A few years later, in a different school and town, I again played football and had a great time. The discipline was well measured and not abusive. Other sports I did went well also.
While I generally agree with Haidt's concept of "not fragile," there needs to be balance and perspective.
I agree here. My son was being badly bullied at college by one older, much larger lad, who had the entire class under his rule, picking on other students, disrupting lessons, even intimidating teachers. It was evident this guy was also something of a 'predator,' trying to manipulate younger, quieter lads.
As parents, we had no idea what was going on, my son trying to ignore the situation and brush off this bully's advances - while we saw he was having trouble finishing assignments, forgot homework, couldn't concentrate on conversations, and became more reclusive and reactionary.
We thought he was finding the course too challenging and reassured him that if he didn't pass his exams this year, it was no matter, there was always next year (thinking this would help reduce the evident stress) - until the day he couldn't take it any more, broke down right in front of us, and told us about this bully.
We were horrified by the things he told us, and because the college wanted to play it down and brush it all under the carpet, we stepped up the action and brought in the police.
The police, fortunately, did think the situation warranted action, the bully was expelled, the class was happy again, and my son's ability over the rest of the year picked up to such a point he got an A-grade.
Had the bully stayed in that class, my son and some of his classmates most definitely would 'not' have been able to continue classes and/or gain the grades they finally did.
Does anyone think that it's okay for parents or authorities to pay education fees - and then stand by and do nothing, letting some bully step in and waste it all for the sake of hoping their child learns a lesson in handling situations not even related to their course-work?
I think not.
Sometimes, you have to step in and be a parent - and that means standing by your kids and 'letting them observe' how situations are dealt with in a suitable manner, because all too many kids 'don't' know what to do and often take a heart-breaking way out (which was exactly what my son was considering! He felt he could not handle life because he didn't know how to handle 'this' particular breed of bully. He did not know who to tell, and I think it says something when he felt he couldn't approach his own teachers).
@@debbiehenri345 👌🏽👌🏽💯
The problem I have with the "what doesn't kill you" expression is because so often it's applied as a way to invalidate experiences that are far beyond what is healthy or normal, and I've worked with many folks with ptsd who frequently have people dismiss or even belittle them precisely because of this expression.
@@andrewtorrens7790 Yes, I hate that response. Why the dichotomy? An ordeal that doesn't destroy you outright can still be damaging, which if repeated over time can really wear you down.
"What doesn't kill you leaves you broken" would be a more appropriate quote.
The video should have mentioned a crucial point about the threshold when the damage received cannot be repaired and becomes a permanent trauma. And no, kids are not infragile 'terminators', although in some respect maybe more resilient they can also receive traumas just like any human beings.
This video in the process of trying to dispell one 'untruth' has created another...
We really need to be teaching kids about our biases, like confirmation bias. I literally had never heard of or thought of these things until 3rd year university in economics classes of all things. This should be elementary level stuff.
"literally"
Agreed. And it points out how those things concerned with economics are actually important to the core of human being. I think generally speaking, the study of economics is vastly undervalued and misunderstood.
Do you have kids?
Nah. We don't need to teach kids about abstract concepts like confirmation bias. We should take their perspective seriously and treat them like people from an early age (while still being responsible parents). We need to not shut them up when they question US but engage them in debates. That way, we teach them that adults can and should always be open to seeing new perspectives. "Confirmation bias" is just a term that will be meaningless to kids if they don't see it applied in the world. And: elementary school kids usually don't reflect on their own thoughts like that. They need adults to show them how it's done until they are mature enough to do it themselves.
Don't know we heard about it in later grades of school, not in depth but by first year of university I had a good understanding and that point was driven home multiple times during our quantitative and qualitative methology classes in university, that started in year one, as well as with basic courses on science theory.
I don't know if it is really that good to expose kids too early to these concepts. In the end bias, be it confirmation bias, be it socio demographic bias, be it group bias develop naturally for certain reasons to actually function in group settings. So burdening them with too much rational thought might maybe stifle their social development and might not even really fully grasp, but might make them insecure - further questioning themselves at a time they already esentially disect themselves. They have time to learn about what a bias is in scientific terms later on, what we need to do is prepare them to be able to grasp such concepts and not discard them because they go against their gut feeling.
0:18 "Damage is always permanent and can't make you stronger. "
1:51 "Always trust your feelings."
3:16 "Each person is only good or only evil."
Very wise advises. Now I can skip the video and start implementing them in my life.
Thank you! I feel like you are a good person.
@@Skolkostoitsamolet is finally at ease.. 🤭👏
@@Skolkostoitsamolet That's not the advise though, that's the great 3 untruths
@@RandyMCPEmaster what are the chances for a person to mention all of the 3 untruths in a single short message and ensure he will not watch the video to fix his beliefs?
Smell of the sarcasm should be strong enough here.
@@Skolkostoitsamolet No emoji, no sarcasm 😔
I always hated the first quote, and i still think its an oversimplification. people need to be challanged to grow, but severe trauma and abuse clearly dosent make you stronger.
Well, maybe it's because little girls just are not looking at it in the right way...they are making the mistake of trusting their feelings...that man that gives them a bad feeling because he held them down and touched them? The bad feeling doesn't mean something is wrong, it's all in their heads! Little girls just don't see the reality that it's good to get raped and molested,they are just listening to their stupid feelings. (Point number 2)
This guy is doing nothing but advocating child abuse.
That really distorts his point. Therapists don't minimize the trauma of abuse. They help people clarify, remove themselves as causative agents, and move into healing. That is helping people change their reaction to trauma.
@@YSLRD that is patently false
What would you know about it anyway? What is your connection?
@@YSLRD I have ptsd. I don't mind this tbh. My favourite advice is 'when you are going through Hell, keep going'.
@@PaladinDusty I'm not playing mind games (like you are). I'm talking about offline reality.
Reality is not up for debate.
I don't need to prove what is real to you or anyone else. All you need in order to know reality is to be brutally HONEST with yourself. Most men can't do that. Can you?
It's true!: What doesn't kill you makes you stronger, or weaker, or has no effect on your strength, but definitely one of the three.
Agreed, seems like inherent optimism bias and terror management theory will always help regardless of ideologies such as antinatalism based on consent.
I never thought that I could ever met somebody who's about to win a Nobel Prize online.
Wisdom is in knowing which one is applicable.
what doesnt kill you makes you ... weirder..
that is a fourth excluded theorem in trinary symbolic logic
I’ve never heard of the first one. I have heard of “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger”, which can be an untruth in some instances. Anyone with PTSD or life long afflictions after pushing themselves into a mental burnout can vouch for that.
If someone cuts off my arms I'll almost definitely be weaker lol
There's also, "God only gives you what you can handle". My reply has often been (in addition to 'I'm an atheist'), "I wish he didn't think I was such a badass". I think we are often given more than we can handle. That's why psychiatrists are on-call in emergency departments.
Yes in some instances, the whole point is that your default method should be to stand up not shrink in the face of a challenge.
Every colloquialism has exceptions. Yes, anything that will permanently damage you has not made you "stronger". But that is missing the point. The idea is by working through micro-stresses we can become resilient to a Macro stress. You lift 50 lbs over and over so that when you NEED it you can lift 100 lbs once.
Perhaps, PTSD and lifelong afflictions are basically in the category of something that "Kills" you. However, when faced with such terrible things you really have only 2 choices, continue to die each day or find your way to live again... not a simple choice nor a simple easy path. No judgments here just an observation from someone who has been there and done that.
#4, " Everything happens for a reason". Damn, I especially hate that one!
Usually the reason is not having planned ahead.😄
I’ve always thought that was bullshit.
Technically it is true, in that every event is caused by a prior event. For example, if you sneeze and crash your car, the reason you crashed your car was because you sneezed. But it's not true in the way it's usually understood, as in it's all part of some big meaningful plan.
@John Michaels depends on the meaning behind reason.
Everything does happen for a reason in physical terms i.e. determinism, sth very unreligious
@John Michaels Could be. But I personally don't see a reason why that should be the case.
It’s fun to be hearing this now as a woman in her early 40s. I can draw a line through my childhood that separates when my mom started hearing media panic about kids’ safety. I remember going off on my own in the mid-80s and even early 90s. Just hopping on my bike and being gone for the day. And sometimes I had fights with my friends and did dangerous things. Then in my teen years some fear set in and I got lectured about safety every time I was going to be home alone. My mom always wanted to do right. She was legit worried about something bad happening to us. But I have a lot of fun memories from when kids ran wild.
TL:DR version:
1- Some stresses are counterproductive, some are momentary, some are productive.
2- Your senses aren't fool proof, neither are your feelings, verify any experience you have.
3- Good and evil are subjective, causality isn't.
That really isn't much of a tl;dr. He already surmised each point succinctly, and much better than you.
PS you mean "fool proof", not full proof.
Haven't found yours.
@@lloydgush What part of "he already surmised it" made you think I would bother to do it myself?
Goddamn mongoloids everywhere. I'm so sick of this planet.
Sorry, I read a bi "I".
@@lloydgush So you don't know how to stop yourself from embarrassing yourself. Not surprising.
Go on then, show us some more of your flaws. You clearly can't help yourself.
"Sharpen a knife too much and it will blunt." -- Lao Tzu
nah
...a testament to “balance”. “Too much of anything ain’t good for you”.
@@endigosun Except for egg nog!
Sharpen a knife too much and eventually you won't have a knife
Never catch a dropped knife
I was hoping he would discuss that other great untruth: that Everything Happens for a Reason. It *does not*.
Well, it does, but not 'because god.'
There's a reason all right--that reason is most likely because you had your head in your arse.
everything does happen for a reason, no one said it would be a good or satisfying reason
This is the statement people use to explain things they don't understand. It is a like the statement people use after someone dies : " He or she is in a better place now". Total nonsense the way it is used to elicit feelings of comfort where other feelings might be more appropriate.
I do agree with the others who commented that everything actually does happen for a reason, implying of coarse that the reason has nothing to do with the supernatural or deity.
Yes! That untruth comes from the belief that there is some great plan controlling everyone and everything. There isn't. The truth is: Sh*t happens. Bad things can happen to good people, and good things can happen to bad people too. And who and what you are has nothing to do with it. If I am at home watching TV, and a piece of space junk crashes on my house and kills me, there is no reason for that. But stuff happens every day. Also, an added untruth to that example would be: She didn't deserve to die. What's that got to do with it? My death in this instance would not be punishment, it would just be my bad luck.
No, you shouldn't protect children from every wrong that can befall them. However, letting bullies continuously have their way with children who are more passive and not alpha by nature is a nearly sure-fire recipe for ending up with an adult who suffers from suicidal depression and needs therapy for the rest of their lives. Bullying is never OK, and it is always wrong to blame the victim. It does not "toughen them up". Parents should not be asking little Johnny what is wrong with them when they are bullied, or allow the school principal to think about a bullied child in terms of "what are we going to do about Johnny?" NO, the question should be, what are you going to do to take the bullies out of the school and send them to juvenile detention, where they belong?! They are the ones with a long-term mental problem - sociopathy.
@@showmemoviesnow "more people are suicidal now than ever" - What are you basing this on?
@@TheGerm24 Statistics, look it up
@@TheGerm24 do some research
Sometimes when the person is bullied
and ignored long enough the consequences are casualties.
If the children no longer have access
to school counselors or guidance
counselors and don't have parents
who talk to their children, the children are left to their own devices and
solutions.
One issue is that it's hard to define bullying. I thought I was bullied in junior high-in hindsight, I was just a pussy. Being teased or made fun of, even by people who didn't really like me, was ultimately good for me, even though I hated them at the time.
But it also does seem obvious that there are extremes where bullying needs to be prevented, because it is legitimately harmful.
Protecting your kids and guiding them to learn from their wounds and injuries are two separate things. When kids are hurt, we not only need to make sure that they are not hurt again, but also should encourage them to learn from their experiences. I believe only in this way can we make sure kids are growing up both healthier and stronger.
Agree, I think a parent should protect but not over protect, looks like a difficult balance to find
yes this is good on a paper but you and i both know that no parents encourage their kids to learn from their experiences. its either overprotect or over criticized which add more trauma. this is true 2 years ago when you wrote your comment and it's still true now when I'm writing mine
This! I think this is the most right
I teach 9 10 & 11 year olds. It's so much easier to straight talk with them, than try and "teacher talk", or come up with a cliche answer because "they are too young to understand". We had a couple of Uber conservative Christian parents complain that kids swear too much. So we had a frank and open conversation about it, and together came up with the idea that swearing is ok in some situations, but that some people don't like it, even if we think it's ok, and that the people that don't like it aren't pussies etc. Some of my favourite films and songs have swearing in them, and it would be dishonest and disengenuous of me to say to them "swearing is bad". They got it, they don't need to be mollycoddled, the kids from the conservative families didn't go home swearing their heads off, the parents were satisfied that we as a school had the discussion about it.
Same sort of deal as the "doesn't kill you make you stronger" some kids need to be exposed to certain stresses in order to grow, some, yet another stressor will just make them crumble.
I really like this view on children, they aren't babies and are more resilient than people give them credit. They are old enough to understand in most instances. I don't know why people see them as weak and naive, many aren't and they are physically destroying and creating their brain as they speak :) Sounds strong to me
@@danbev8542 actually it's you who is
You are so right! When my son was 4-5 or so, we explained that certain words, foods, drinks, actions were for grownups. He seem to accept that. At your 9-11 age group, your conversations sound like they were perfectly appropriate. I think it’s better to err on the side of too much information-most will tune out TMI & come back with questions when they are ready.
I also hate when people try to guilt others or shame them by saying "If you're not the part of the solution your part of the problem".
perhaps you should stop and think about that one.
@@donHooligan Nah I thought about it, it doesn't always apply. Especially the context in which it is used, it's usually used to guilt people and creates and us vs them divide. I hate it and I think we should do away with it.
If you wanna convince someone to get on your side you should get rid of these kinds of divisive statements.
Some people may just have been ignorant of the issue and maybe they haven't considered different perspectives or thought about it in any depth. Hearing this kind of language is likely to turn them away. It did for me any time it has been used.
Some people may just want a quiet life and that ok too as long as they're not actively harming people or get in the way of the solution to the issue.
@@justaguy6216
actively harming people...like buying food and clothing...
you think that your support of slavery doesn't harm anyone, i take it...?
you've been trained to destroy this planet.
...and you *ARE* part of the problem. i could almost guarantee it.
@@donHooligan What are you on about? Where tf did slavery come into this? Food and clothing? What?
Besides my main issue with that statement is the use of it. It doesn't help the cause, it most likely hinders it.
@@justaguy6216
your ignorance as to how this relates to slavery is why you are part of the problem.
every aspect of your life is dependent upon slavery, somewhere down the line.
rather than live responsibly, you just play dumb.
Well.. I was bullied and ostracized, and that definitely did NOT make me stronger.
It's a bit like the immune system. If a disease is not too destructive we can survive it and our immune system is now equipped to fight that disease the next time. But! If the disease is very harmful, (1) we might not survive it, or (2) it might do permanent damage such that we aren't really stronger afterwards.
Yea, the classic "what doesn't destroy you. .
etc" has its limitations. It doesn't consider that something which doesn't destroy you may weaken you to where you could be ovetwhelmed by something you might otherwise have withstood.
Ikr. There are two sides of every coin. Just as you can't completely put kids in a bubble, you can't keep letting people slap them around and hope they develop leather skin. This guy is full of crap, justifying old commonsense reasoning in place of the new. The truth is that both extreme commonsense reasoning will destroy kids
I hope you have not been traumatised. Wish you good life.
@Dancing Fool Nicely said. I really take exception to Cliche Wisdom. Cliches can have substance, but too often people spew them out with no consideration for any depth.
I really hate "do, or not. There is no 'try'". People spoon it out as if it's just sooo profound. It's a great thing to be able to do (right out of Dao De Ching), but you can't just suddenly DO something difficult, the only way there is through a lot of conscious, deliberate trying.
It’s a fine line between protecting and nurturing vs strengthening. By temperament, people tend to err on one side or the other. Very rarely do we hit it exactly in the middle. By temperament I’m a more empathetic and understanding person, so when someone feels traumatized I tend to err on the side of openness rather than tell them to “man up” or whatever nonsense.
The comment above is an excellent illustration of exactly the problem Haidt is exposing: prioritizing feeling over thinking.
"Manning up" has gotten a very bad rap in recent decades, as have men and masculinity generally. Most of the time, to “man up” is exactly what's needed - to take a more stoic perspective - whether we’re talking about young men or young women.
My wife grew up in a poor third world country, and now, living in a comfy California suburb, almost nothing phases her. Her parents had to figure out a way to survive, to simply eat on a daily basis, or it was curtains or the whole family, and my wife learned super-resilience from this. In many ways, she's a better man than I am.
By contrast, I was in the first coddled generation, the Dr. Spock generation. We Boomers, the 1970’s “Me Generation,” basically had everything handed to us. We were the ones who finally had enough free time to invent first world problems like the need for "openness,” creating large group "awareness trainings," paying way too much attention to feelings over common sense and rationality.
Now, what's needed is for more of us, particularly those of younger generations - for whom the importance of "openness" and "feelings" has become so greatly overblown - to "man up” more often (much more often).
Yes, feelings matter - but not as much as rational thinking about actual reality (which is the basis of CBT, and Haidt's main point) - and not NEARLY as much as we've been taught in recent decades and have been overtly teaching young people in our schools and colleges since the "self esteem" education movement of the 1980s.
That’s essentially what Haidt is saying, and I couldn’t agree with him more. Bravo, Professor Haidt!
@@chrisborland4972 I think you misunderstand my comment.
@@Dialogos1989 How so?
@@whoshoe537 My main point was there is a balance between feminine and masculine love. In no way was I implying that feelings should be prioritized over thinking. I admitted my weakness in that I tend to err on the side of feminine love due to my temperament. But ideally, we should sit in the middle.
Haidt might argue that this is impossible. In his book "the happiness hypothesis," he draws an analogy of the mind as the rider on an elephant. Our rational thinking is the rider, and our feelings are the elephant. The rider can nudge the elephant this way or that, but the one with the true power is the elephant. We cannot suffocate our feelings with "willpower" or whatever (this is what I meant by "man up." ). This is also encouraged with CBT. We do not suppress our feelings. That only creates more internal conflict. We acknowledge them. This is the only way to train them over time.
@@Dialogos1989 Thanks for clarifying. That's not my experience, however.
Perhaps I disagree with Haidt on feelings being the "elephant." It's hard to separate feelings and thoughts completely, but my experience with the assumption that feelings were the primary energy, and therefore deserved the bulk of the attention when trying to improve one's mental health, the idea promoted by most psychotherapy and psychology since the 1970s, is that this idea is simply wrong, and doesn't work in practical terms very well at all.
In fact, I’ve found, consistently, after years and years of ineffective “feelings centered” psychotherapy, that the “feelings first” model works quite poorly, and leads to much unnecessary frustration and angst. I believe this is because the model is fundamentally flawed. Only when I found out that irrational thoughts gave rise to unnecessary unhappy emotions did my own mental health actually begin to improve, and did I first begin to experience any sense of real control over my emotional life.
There's no doubt that the basic insights of CBT simply work, clinically - and in my own personal experience, the "feelings exploration therapies" simply do not. For others, it might be different, but I really believe that "old therapies die hard," even very ineffective ones (like Freudian psychoanalysis) and that "feelings first" psychotherapy will be with us for some time, probably to our detriment.
The driver/elephant analogy to thoughts/feelings is faulty on at least one dimension: there is a clear separation between driver and elephant, while there is no such clear separation between thoughts and feelings. It's very hard to tell which comes first. Which is the cause, and which is the effect. Very much a "chicken and egg" type thing.
One thing is certain, however: thoughts are much easier to control than feelings. Feelings are almost impossible to actively control. They simply come, when they come. Similarly, thougths can be completely involuntary, appearing out of nowhere. But unlike feelings, thinking can be voluntary as well as involuntary; thoughts are different in that they can also be controlled in active (and, later, habitual/retrained) ways. Thoughts are like breathes: breathing happens naturally, and as long as one is alive, breathes will take place, no matter what. But breathing can also be deliberately controlled, often with dramatic and beneficial results.
In my experience, trying to control feelings without trying to control thinking is fruitless. A waste of time. An expensive and frustrating waste of time, actually - if one is spending a great deal of money and time for psychotherapy with almost no benefit over a period of decades.
Again, this is just my experience. Yours, of course, might be different.
“Always trust your feelings” I learned the hard way this is not good
True, feelings are based on emotion, and not in logic. Trust your inner Spock
Feelings need close analysis
Trusting your feelings is fine, but it doesn't mean you'll get the results that you want.
Trust your instincts not your impulses. A good way to tell the difference is by masterbating and seeing if the feeling has gone away afterwards.
@@lordeverybody872 oh please, "logic" is not flawless. some things NEED to be based on emotion, see that's a problem right there, that mentality that's as bullshit as simple, black and white "good vs. evil". It's not that simple and logic doesn't always win and it shouldn't always. Logic could mean letting your child die, but emotion will mean you will fight it with every ounce of your being as well you fucking should. don't be one of those. Vulcans are overrated idiots.
Thank you for reminding us of these key points. It does seem, though, that the speaker imagines that this is some new condition. I'm 70. Perhaps what has happened is that families are having far fewer children. I was the fourth of five, the third of three boys. You get lots of socialization in a family of that size. In public we were largely sheltered because of where we lived and went to school. The culture was monolithic, like the people. In my high school of 2,000 students, there were two or three black, four or five Jews, maybe a hundred kids with a Far East Asian origin, but about 15% Hispanic. These were bused off the campus every day to study at a vo-tech school, not in academic programs. Strangely, the people who were "offended" the most were advocates of war and racism when they were rebuffed. When a rabbi came to the school to speak about generosity of spirit and understanding, many parents went nuts. When a John Birch Society (alt-right) speaker was trounced at a Vietnam War debate by a retired Rear Admiral, parents complained that it was "one-sided."
All of this extra sensitivity was bred into kids by their irrational parents. We shouldn't be surprised that their legacy lives on, if sometimes inverted. As the speaker seems to suggest, we have to use a great deal of introspection to address these matters.
Good points
Not to be rude but are you still alive?
@@phanomtaxskibididoodoo Yes...I think so.
Brilliant!!!
@@MontyVierra Ok cool i am sorry if it sounded rude i am 18 and i was just surprised.
The untruth that annoys me the most is “everything happens for a reason.”
I taught my kids to always listen to their 'gut' feelings, or intuition. If you have a really bad feeling about a person or situation, pay attention to it. Your subconscious may be warning you about something important.
This. Your instincts don't lie. You just have to learn the difference between your instincts, and your impulses.
Well, this is a myth that needs to be dispelled...
How many of us minorities have wrongly had the cops called on us, because a white person had a bad "gut" feeling??
@@roninski3638 Intuition is a product of experience, not instincts. I would warn against *blindly* following instincs, as we are humans and should strive to be more conscious than animals.
This is especially true for Empaths and the school system beats it out of them. Empaths trusting their "instincts" should definitely be enhanced and promoted. It is part of their natural life gifts. It is really a read of the interior of the other person energy and all. So kids who score within the Diplomat section of the MBTI test need this promoted in their lives and learn to trust it. These reads aren't necessarily learned from experience but they get a better handle on what the reads mean with experience for sure. The AlexXx post below suggesting intuition is only a learned process is most likely a Sensor and not an Empath. Also The analyst Section of the MBTI tests are also empaths, with a slightly different twist because they are Thinkers Logic based whereas the Diplomats are feeing based. Diplomats and Analysts added together are only 25% of the population. School, work and other mediums of current society are not really set up for them at all. And they all score highest in the genius ranges for EQ and IQ and gifted classes etc. So if you have one of these kids you are blessed but also need to learn about what makes them tick because most all the diplomats are completely misunderstood by the majority of the population. And sometimes by themselves. LOL.
One (of the many) key things I noticed growing up was that in school they would show pictures and short movies about adults who want to kidnap you using fake smiles etc. It was so odd to me because I could spot fake in an instant and so obviously that I wondered why they showed the film. I think this was 2nd grade. And also critiques the film in my head as they made many mistakes pointing this stuff out. But hey.
Yes Gut Feelings are truer your stomach is your first brain and linked directly to the brain in your skull.
@@alexxx4434 we are animals. And while we should strive to be conscience of our actions and thoughts, our instincts still play a very important role in our survival, and we shouldn’t just ignore them and self-doubt.
I've always interpreted the "What doesn't kill you" caveat as encouragement for trying something, as in"if you don't try you'll never know". Obviously not to be used in situations that actually could result in death or severe injury, but situations where reluctance and hesitancy are the issue for not doing something....
What doesn't kill you Makes you wish you were dead, that which does kill you makes you dead!
Yeah, the video should have mentioned this important moment about the threshold when the damage received cannot be repaired and becomes a permanent trauma. And no, kids are not infragile 'terminators', they can also receive traumas just like any human beings.
This video in the process of trying to dispell one untruth has created another untruth...
This IS the general meaning that seemingly blew right over Mr. Haidt's head in his search for an easy headline quote. Its not supposed to be taken literally as in "subject yourself to trauma to become stronger."
But he does have a point about resilience. Its just that Resilience Theory doesn't have a lot of sexy colloquialisms to draw from.
@@alexxx4434 That isn't necessary because people with basic coping mechanisms (the point the video makes) will be able to differentiate the POINT from the EXTREME that the point isn't making.
@@HeadCannonPrime I don't know about the "general meaning", but it IS very much the meaning intended in the original quote. It comes from Nietzsche. That's also the how I've personally always heard it used (though I'm not American, maybe people tend to understand that quote differently in the US).
The growth mindset of carol dweck, the priority sorting of Mark Manson, and the overlap between psychology and mysticism of alan watts has done me a lot of good this year
Thanks for this. I think Critical Thinking is not being taught as a key life skill. This is a major deficiency. Great presentation on these bad, so called 'truths'.
Critical thinking is a skill the media and government doesn’t want us to have. How else will they manipulate us?
I have three for you
1. Don’t cut toward yourself
2. Don’t believe people who say “believe me”
3. Always start with nice
Never destroy someones (psychological) defense mechanisms, unless you have something better to replace them with. This applies even to defences like 'denial', the great protector of addiction among other behaviours. To simply advocate exposing a child to exclusion etc., without a preparation of that child's personal society, is not going to make them anti-fragile, it will simply hurt them. The other thing to consider is that due to the combination of factors that have shaped a child's psychological mechanism, actions which might strengthen one child, may break another. Well meaning people, acting out of care and love for a child may use your suggestions wisely to that child's benefit, but many people will simply use them as an excuse to abuse someone they detest. Take a bully and thug, like Ben Shapiro and he will victimise the marginalised and weak and justify his words and actions by claiming he is just helping to make that person, or group stronger. I'm assuming it is still reasonable to characterise someone as a bully, without falling into a good-evil binary trap.
Unfortunately, you are part of the problem here.
The biggest thing is that a child cannot create those mechanisms of they do not encounter any issues in the first place. And so while there is some merit to the idea of it breaking another, it is INCREDIBLY unlikely and even if it does the healing process from that means that they will likely not break in future.
Secondly, it's a large misinterpretation to say it is in any way an avocation or can even be used as an avocation to bully and abuse others. As it's simply being willing to go into things that might be harmful not one to say it will be harmful.
Final thing is calling Ben Shapiro a bully and claiming he will victimize the marginalized lmao. I genuinely don't have any idea where this comes from and seems like a narrow idea that tries to paint conservatives as those who want to bully others which is such a large distorting of the Temperment and values to really question if you've ever taken a minute to even think about what is advocated for.
Today , I see and hear people slamming "experts", slamming "education",
slamming "the other guy" for "believing different than I do" .
Many people do not believe in education, see no need to listen to anybody
else , because "they don't know anything".
The phrase "What doesn't kill makes me stronger" was written by Nietzsche and it was not general observation from him but a more a way to approach life. The "me" is important in this sentence. "What doesn't kill - me - makes me stronger" Its a way of life, the only and best answer to suffering.
This has been a trend in humans to take something from somewhere else and pasting on something else just because sounded great and has no practical use, Like what happened to the greatest myth of all time that we can only use 10% of our brain and debunked by the scientist time to time.
@@abhaysharma9317 Isn't using 100% of your brain called a seizure?
@Jan Andhisfiets If this approach works for you, wonderful. But it is neither the only nor the best approach to suffering. The fact is that people can experience suffering that actually damages the body and the brain, causing physical and mental illness and injury. The entire field of epigenetics studies, among other things, how this happens and to what degree. It's the same with "everything happens for a reason" which many people have observed in their lives; it works up to a point but when suffering is meaningless and destructive, usually brought on by the dysfunction or evil in others, this also becomes false. The more encompassing response to suffering is the Buddhist philosophy of letting go of desires and attachment to self so one no longer experiences suffering as suffering. This doesn't break down on any scale but is not easily achieved. "Only and best" approach reveals that you haven't experienced the most extreme stress, for which I am very happy. I hope you never do.
@@gmkbelanger I disagree with the Buddhist idea of letting go of desires. I like to let go of demands. The difference is this: I can desire something and be willing not to have it. If I don't demand to have it, I don't become agonized over not getting it. But I like to pursue desires. And to that exact point: I like to point out my view to you, and I desire that you come to see the reason of it. But I want to steer clear of demanding that you agree with me. You're free to see it the way you'd like. Also..."That which does not kill me makes me stronger." is incorrect. Nothing makes me stronger but me. If something doesn't kill me, it's up to me to make myself stronger by it, or at least not be bothered by it. That, I can do.
The major problems "big thinkers" identify in the current generations of children and young adults are limited to observations of young people in their class and community.
There are lots of great, hardworking young adults in my lower and middle class group of friends. They have solid values and lean toward critical thinking when they aren't consumed by their bad situations.
You are absolutely right, and he knows it: the constraints of the format prevented him from saying that, but in most long-form video featuring him he states that most young people are just fine, but there is a minority of troubled young people big enough to be a serious problem, and not just in the "elites".
He's talking about what he knows. You talk about what you know.
The adage “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” is not meant as a truth, but a coping mechanism like “ sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me”
Yes, I agree. I think people often misunderstand Nietzsche when he wrote this in one of his works.
It's not an adage to begin with. It's a platitude.
There are some instances where trusting your feelings is essential. Like, for example, when all your instincts tell you that you're in the wrong position at work, you probably are. If you see a guy who just gives you the creeps all over, then you could be wrong about them -- it's true. But it's better to avoid them and perhaps risk offending them a bit than it is to end up naked in a shallow grave.
The bone analogy is probably a good one. Some amount of stress is good and helps to keep the system in health, but if it breaks it's going to take a while to heal from the damage and the whole system may experience long term adverse effects.
I feel like the first one really should be “some damage is permanent and can’t make you stronger, other damage is strengthening”. Underexposing kids can undermine their confidence and independence, but some things will really mess kids up long term. The same applies to adults. Some hardship teaches you that you are capable of working through hardship or teaches you the skills needed to work through various struggles, while others can leave you with phobias, paranoia, or even full blown ptsd. There is a balance that has to be struck here.
Wow, quote 1 caused a commotion. I think we need to teach our children that if troubles find you, you DO have the ability to overcome it. We need a "solution" based thinking, but we're stuck on "problem" based thinking. Of course we're going to wallow in our traumas when the rest of the world doesn't want you to move on. Time to start thinking solutions than just what's the problem, because we can't control every hurtful thing that happens to us, we can only react to it
You don't need "solutions." you need coping mechanisms so if the "problem" is solved or not, you're OK either way
@@bobmcbobbington9220 yes and healthy coping mechanisms, not unhelpful/unhealthy ones.
If you think you are damaged, question that thought. If you are upset, get in touch with your emotion and see where it is really coming from.. If you stay still a bit, it usually dissolves. If the upset keeps coming back, look deeper.. Increased awareness will point out a way out in time..
What doesn’t destroy you makes you stronger.
Till it don’t.
I most especially hate how Instagram therapists are tuning people sooo much into their feelings to such a point you’re like - wait a minute - thats a malignant form of canceling people 🤔🤔
Yup. I got cancelled by dozens because of dozens of 'easy lies to swallow'.
Later, when everyone found out that it was all lies... it's not like anyone apologized, hahahaha.
The ones which owed me favors and money probably just forgot about all of it and posted more selfies. 😂🤣😂
Interesting and well explained, thanks
wait, im confused....the first untruth is "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger"...but he then says its true?
my brain cant follow.
No, the first untruth is, "what doesn't kill you makes you weaker."
I agree. I think this video actually has 1 truth and 2 untruths.
The first truth he debunks is written on the screen at 0:15.
Very confusing indeed…
Hard Times makes strong men.
Strong men make good times.
Good times make weak men.
Weak men make hard times.
Repeat....
And women civilize them? Kidding...
What a load of USA bunkum.
And good women makes good times, hence men weak... tricky! :O
That's a fucking stupid idea
That is some bullshit you read on the internet no doubt. I'll bet it was a meme.
Every time I hear this man speak, I find myself nodding
Me too, soo sleepy, I nod off. Boomers are so fragile. I have a list of 3 things we should tell all boomers, especially professors. 1. Your generation failed to make the world any better based on your measurable results. You have no moral authority to talk about other generations. 2. Neoliberalism sucks. 3. Your feelings are just as objective as mine.
@@greorbowlfinder7078 All boomers? I'm of that generation. You don't know me, or my thinking.
@@mickberry164 correct, only your results.
@@greorbowlfinder7078 you are so fragile
Not, “always follow your feelings” which can mean emotions. It’s supposed to be, always follow your intuition, which is arguably never wrong.
I didn’t know “always trust your feelings” was even a thing, I had always heard the saying “trust your gut” or “trust your intuition” which to me means something very different. It means to trust that primitive side of the brain to alert you to danger, I think that it is much better equipped to do so. I’ve even heard a serial killer talk about this, that people would get “spooked” and just shake it off right before he would attack them. Trust your gut is a very important thing to pass on to your kids in my opinion especially since kids can be so prone to second guessing themselves. The original saying is about trusting your instincts which can provoke emotions, not the other way around.
He isn't suggesting to not trust your gut/feelings. Rather not to use them to objectively determine something. For example, say you encounter some girl in the bar, and you feel like she isn't the most likable person. You'd keep that in mind, but you wouldn't solely use that to determine whether shes good or not.
Even if you felt like somebody was about to murder you, you don't use that to objectively determine if thats the case, your brain just decides its better to not take the risk of dying in that case.
Hopefully i worded that well.
That would make sense if intuition and feelings were interchangeable words that mean the same thing but they don’t. Feelings are emotions created by neuropeptides in the brain and is released in body, you can even become addicted to these hormones so they are a somewhat unreliable yet powerful tool. Whereas guts is about your bodies instincts receiving signals from its environment that are so subtle that consciously you may not recognize the them but your primitive brain and body is still attune and aware. When this is happening your body will then alert you by releasing the neuropeptids that create emotions like fear, unease, tension and similar so you can face whatever it is. If someone trust their gut, that’s good. And if someone is running around trusting all their emotions that is nuts… it is misrepresenting the intention of the original saying and making it a dumb saying that no one should do, so yeah don’t do that. The logic feels redundant, unhelpful(like get people killed level of unhelpful) and circular.
@@gabriellesmith5661 ah, I see. That’s good to know
Exactly. Gavin de Becker, The Gift of Fear. Everything you said is perfect.
He is talking about "belief perserverance" in which people resist evidence or logical argument which discomforts their feelings, or "lived experience" or "personal truths". The idea that feelings are unquestionable is what he is challenging.
I always thought "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" means that if I was in a fight club or something that pushes my body to its limits and I don't die... I get stronger... I have never thought about it in the way Jonathan expressing it.
"You can be anything you want to be when you grow up."
While technically true I think this is usually very bad advice/guidance to give children. Let me assure you that you do not want me to do your corporation's taxes for you. Could I study to be a CPA? Yes. Would I have to study 5 times as hard as someone else that has a natural proclivity for understanding huge volumes of complex, sometimes contradictory, tax code and how those codes apply to your specific business? Yes. I would have to study that much harder and it would take me much longer to do so. Even then I still wouldn't have the reflexive instincts that would yield the best possible positive outcomes as compared to the people who have inherent capabilities in this category of skill set.
When my kids have asked me what my thoughts are on a future vocation I always say that it should be something you love to do AND that you are naturally good at. If it is only something that you love to do but don't have a natural inclination for then consider making that your hobby but make the way that you earn your living something that you are naturally adept at.
Thanks for your last paragraph. I did not distinguish between loving something and being naturally good at it. I falsely assumed the two were highly correlated.
The truth is... You can be whatever the rest of the world lets you be! But it's a sad truth so your advice is probably much better for inspiring kids.
Haidt is doing amazing work. If only more people were humble enough to listen...
The biggest danger of good vs evil thinking. Is that when one defines oneself as good, one tends to automatically see one's own actions as good. After all why would a good person do something bad.
1) What doesn't break you makes you stronger
2) Always trust your feelings
3) Life is a battle between good peiple and evil people
" Everyone is an expert on something. "
" You can be anything you want, and you will probably wind up an asshole. "
" The same mind that screws up shit, has to clean up the mess. "
" No matter how much you research an idea, confirm, test, or indoctrinate an idea, you will find that someone who thinks you're wrong. "
You are using quotations... Where are you getting these from? I especially like the second one 😉
these sound good on the surface but if the first three are definitely not true and don't hold up in real life experiences.
the fourth one might actually be true but would be difficult to prove as true.
Kids are not born today as little princes and princesses. They shouldn't be told they are. Other people have a right to say what they believe in without being seen as enemies to these to these little royalty. They don't need protection from other viewpoints, they need to learn to interact and relate to others and analyse those differences. Life is not black or white, good or evil. Life like water always seems to find a new level that works for it. Life is symbiotic not a competition that leads just one winner. That's a false narrative.
kids are born to pay taxes and support the work force. mainly.
+@@bobbytookalook
Yeah, just imagine how must worse America would be if the leader of the country had to be humbled and bend the knee to someone else.
bobbytookalook
, Actually No. No one is born a prince or princess. There are just people treating them as such.
The best rulers know they are servants of the people. The king and the horse groomer are not separate and of different castes the king just serves the kingdom as the horse groomer serves his horse.
That is why I only seek to rule myself. But be as helpful to others as I can.
*_Peace if we can keep it_*
put all children in trash compactors. or a wood chipper
#1 "Kids are anti-fragile", yes, except for myriad ways in which they aren't. Trauma causes long-lasting harm, stressors are cumulative, abuse can be permanent. Bullying is a frequent causal predictor of self-harm including suicide. So sure, don't try to make their lives sterile and challenge-free, but also don't expose them to lead, cholera, poverty, malnutrition, abuse, bullying, etc. Kids aren't wine glasses, but they aren't plastic cups either, and nor are they entirely like immune systems or bones.
Well said.
He was talking about the harm parents do when treating their kids as fragile. And what idiot would expose their kids to lead, cholera, etc? If you're going to try and argue against his propositions at least make your arguement realistic and centre it on what he actually said.
Let Darwin work as intended.
@@thomasdequincey5811 I think the criticism here is that the video is very vague, and many forms of bullying and mental abuse can end up being as harmful as lead or cholera in the long run. Plus, plenty of parents currently are becoming anti-vaxers, so they are exposing their kids to diseases as bad as or worse than cholera intentionally, so the answer to your question is, more than you would think.
If you just take the video at face value, it proposes that kids need to be exposed to danger and harm to build up a thick skin, but doesn't put any limits on it, when we know that childhood experiences can lead to life long trauma and injury.
@@thomasdequincey5811 Miss the point much bro? You sound like the idiot to me.
Instead of just teaching kids that bullying is bad (which obviously most bullies don't listen to), we should also be teaching children how to deal with bullies.
"Always trust your feelings" could be very dangerous advice to someone who suffers from mental illness such as Paranoid Delusional.
This idea of anti-fragility (as opposed to fragility and resilience) is very interesting. But I wonder what the thresholds are. At what point does something go from being antifragile to fragile? Where is the breaking point? How do you optimize the dose of adversity to develop antifragility without breaking? Is this why bullying exists - to inoculate us against larger adversities? Interesting.
That's what makes parenting hard, riding that line. But to just protect your child from everything or nothing is just lazy parenting.
And selfish, honestly.
"How do you optimize the dose"?
We don't. Just let go.
Just letting go is to the benefit of the anti-fragile at the great cost of the fragile. I want better than a coin flip to know which.
@@thescowlingschnauzer you or your children are not appointed by god or nature to be fragile or antifragile. You and them will become one or the other due to YOUR choices. If you keep living in fear like this, you'll always see yourself (or your children) as fragile, and nothing will ever have the chance to show you you're wrong. Only facing adversity we become antifragile.
Ffs listen again to the video, he basically said all this
What doesnt kill you might make you 'stronger' in some sense, but a lot of people become bitter, cynical, stressed and depressed as a result of challenging life events. Maxims like this arent as wise as they appear and offer no practical help. If you want to help people you need to offer skills and solutions, on a personal _and_ societal/poltical level.
What doesn't kill you eventually gives you cancer
I see the case that you're making, but I think the point of this Maxim is to embrace a mindset that tries to help you learn from your failures and challenges. You're right, just because something bad in your life happens it doesn't mean that you become stronger for it by default. The point here though, is that In order to become stronger you need to be introspective about what went wrong and make sure to guard against it in the future. The world's most successful people have all experienced a myriad of failures in life; the difference between them and and those who become cynical is all about mindset. If you believe that adversity builds strength, then every failure can be a learning opportunity, and I think what he's saying is that this is the mindset we should be teaching kids. It's an important clarification to an otherwise oversimplified maxim
You completely missed his point that CHILDREN need to be challenged more and allowed to deal with the world as it and the consequences of their own actions, rather thsn shielded from these things, in order to build the necessary tough skin and emotions coping mechanisms to more successfully masssge life as an adult without becoming depresses, anxious, bitter or resentful.
@@reivardi5 ..... and children should be tought those solutions you speak of... many, they will inherently learn on their own through the process of not being told the untruths or being shielded from bad things.
Basically everyone I know is worse, not better, off for their hardships and we see this in the large statistics too.
Just see attachment styles or the results of those who grow up in bad neighborhoods.
This is usually just an excuse to wash your hands of helping another and only serves to hurt the growth of both victim and abuser.
Everything happens as random chaos, afterward we rationalize the circumstance and we then develope a reasonable explanation. If other wise we could predict the conclusion of every event. There always is some X factor hidden in any complex event that can change the direction of any action.
I think that's right, but I also suspect that many people find it too scary. I hope not.
Here is my more complete version of these 3 psychological truths:
1. What does´nt kill you just has not killed you, so you have the chance to become stronger depending on how you (can) deal with it. Antifragility is a matter of how you respond and adapt(mostly unconsciously) to what happens to you. Here´s the trick:
That adaption can go either way so what doesn´t kill you can also cause you to maladapt (like in the case of PTSD) or it can damage you (brain damage for example). In any case what happens to you will change you in some way or another and will probably have all sorts of undected secondary effects. And what adaptions happen is also limited by the resources available for you to adapt (like a secure attachment base for little children).
But these changes provoked or elicited by stress don´t necessarily need said stress as a prerequirement, and even if they do you don´t have to be just thrown into stress you can (and imho should) actually use it to deliberately and systematically culivate yourself.
2. Trust your feeling but don´t trust them blindly. Feelings are not a problem so lang as you are aware and anticipating of where they are leading you. It´s not like you have to shut your feelings down in order to think more clearly . Feelings are actually quite helpfull for thought so long as you engage with the thoughts and hunches they present you.
Feelings can also be grounded in experience and expertise and not just in primitive emotional reactions. If that is the case, respect those feelings that reflect your accumulated wisdom.
3. Life is a battle between people, although this battle is influenced by how evil/good the participants are it is very often not caused by that and sometimes influenced by it in paradoxiacal ways.
We both have the potential for good and evil acts in us, but we don´t all lead equally good/evil lifes. Some people are more or less disposed to good or evil and some people repeatedly think and act evil. And we can fairly easily approximate the good/evil in someone´s character based on their characteristics in this regard (Of course we always have to consider context!) There is no reason here to obfuscate that fact. Some people are just evil, which means they are more likely to do evil things because they are disposed to do those thing or have repeatedly done them in the past (like deliberately harming others for personal gain or just out of sadism). And of course some people don´t just do evil they want evil.
This 100%! We should be teaching children how to deal with unpleasantness, not removing the source of unpleasant interactions. I was not given the tools I needed to protect myself as I was forming, hence I had to learn much later in life on my own. Adults get overly involved with children’s interactions, stifling the learning process. I believe we have overcompensated for a few negative experiences. All beings need to understand how to process disappointment, others not liking them, being picked on and legitimate or illegitimate criticism.
Read the book, THE CODDLING OF THE AMERICAN MIND, and don’t fall into the trap many of the commentators on this video do of thinking they can speak for Haidt and co-author Greg Lukianoff, both far more knowledgeable and nuanced than those trying to label the “targets” with some simplistic left-right bull.
Everyone partly good and bad, so it's important that I educate people who are ideologically wrong so that they can align themselves to my own belief system.
I am objectively correct and have nothing left to learn.
@@violet-trash It's more like, "As a psychologist, it is my job to help people learn to be mentally healthy, so I will write books/ make videos to try and make them aware of important psychological principles.
Very true. Political bias is ruining so much
Good v evil has always rubbed me the wrong way. I don’t believe in “evil.”
Evil is real
We should try not to be fragile. But every _real_ bully in America says "whatever doesn't kill you, makes you stronger", as they attack. And bullying, not just fragility, is a real problem. Sadists ARE getting worse.
Mcfirefly2 pussy boi mentality
What??? Bullies don't say (or think) that as they attack. They aren't trying to make you stronger, they're trying not to feel so weak themselves. I think you're giving the bullies too much credit.
@@76JStucki They don't say it as they attack. They say it to society, before and after attacks, to divert blame from bullies to the victims, or to make bullying seem like a Darwinian good, which they have tricked foolish people into believing is good. That saying basically makes bullying the rule of society: gotta have bullying and cruelty to make us "strong", right? "Bloody in tooth and claw." I don't agree with it; I think it is diabolical.
If they cause physical harm, they are violent. If bullies only taunted, they would have no power at all.
One of the worst things to tell a child (even if you mean well) is "You did your best" after a child doesn't do well.
This is the equivalent of "you failed and I expected failure from you, your best will always be a failure".
A better way is to say something like "ok, you came last/didn't pass etc but are capable of doing better if you really want to. If you'd rather do something else that's fine but I don't believe for one second that you can't improve".
I believe this attitude is why my oldest son, at the age of 16, was chosen by a bunch of adult climbers with an average of 20 years experience of climbing to take the lead on "le pantere rose" a 130 m (400ft) cliff in southern France. His brothers are doing just as well in their own fields too. My second is a 5'8" basketball player.
Just this morning my niece told me about her baby getting teeth.
I thought, pain when we didn’t do anything. is introduced. Of course, most do not consciously remember teething but the concept is introduced on a deeply unconscious level which sends out ‘connections’ when pain hurts us.
It is only through an adult who has critical thinking skills and understanding educating kids, do kids have a chance of real balance.
I see so many generations sharing dysfunctional attitudes. I moved out of such tribal thinking. My kids are doing so much better than i. I have hope my grandchild can do even better. 💓
"Everything is on a spectrum, except my opinions."
I object to talking about "kids" in a general sense as this. WHAT AGE OF CHILD ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? The younger the child, the less resilient they are. It is wrong to try to toughen up an infant. You have to be age specific in order to be age appropriate.
Maybe get a book? Child psychology almost always deals with children who can communicate verbally. Notice how he talks about teasing and playing etc?
This speaker has an interesting, balanced view. I want to hear more from him.
As for #2, true, reality and one's perception of it sometimes differ, but I think as you get older and gain more experience, your "gut" instinct gets right more and more often and should definitely be considered when making decisions.
Kids need to face unpleasentness and conflicts to become better people, but they also need a place where they feel safe and loved, only if they have someone that they can trust and that can help them understand those unpleasentness and conflicts they will come out stronger from them, if they don't have such a figure and a safe place those things will harm them
i think there are happy balances to all these points. we dont want to coddle our kids every time they scratch their knee. but we do want to prevent them from breaking their arm. people should examine the situation, and not just trust their feelings. but intuition plays a helpful role in a person's life. it if quacks like a duck... and some people are definitely more "evil" than other people. so we want to help kids get the wisdom to be able to discern for themselves which people to move towards, and which ones to avoid.
I learned a lot from this... interestingly, 99% of what I learned was from the comments. Lesson learned: Don't judge the learning from the contents of the video.
One thing, a lot of people use the first point as an excuse for neglect or abuse, so it’s a fine balance you have to strike, to support and encourage but not baby.
No one uses the first point to excuse abuse. It's used to encourage victims of abuse.
Good to see big think continue to step out of its echo chamber
I stand a lot by the first quote. While I will agree that abuse is very damaging and can cut someone's lifespan by a certain amount of time (either by actual damage to the brain/body or suicide), I think the opposite is extremely damaging as well (protecting our children, teenagers and young adults to the point they have the parents' perception of a perfect life), considering that the shock of a very unnurturing and sometimes brutal reality can be so bad it causes depression and make someone feel like their entire life was a lie.
I think it applies well to my case, where I was very sheltered and barely went out or anything. I had the occasional blunder and friendship and even a high time, but I feel like I matured the fastest after being truly exposed to cruel reality from age 16 onwards.
But at the same time, the effects of overprotection and parents that still saw me as a child and treated me as such with control methods and not trusting me as much nearly drove me to suicide.
Only thing that saved me? One time it was my dog and the rest were online friends/lovers I cared about. But I really just wanted to find a better situation where I didn't feel as sheltered.
I'm managing to improve but life still is difficult at times. I think in the end, finding a balance is the most helpful thing, and I do believe that the three guidelines shown in the video can go a long way to create mature adults in the future that - hell knows, maybe will even change society permanently.
Great video, great communicator, succinct, eloquent and deep.
I just love when people talk about how to fix the education system. It's a money problem plain and simple. It's honestly just a low priority.
Care to explain? Why is it a money issue?
@@huckaf Schools are underfunded, teachers pay is often below the rates needed to be comfortable in the areas they teach, and promised raises from the plan when they were hired based on time spent teaching, to account for experience, are frozen when the government doesn't provide funding. Not to mention that teachers often have to buy supplies with their paycheck, instead of it being provided by the school. Building off that note, many schools simply lack the funding to hire people for every position they are supposed to fill or to provided the resources to help students really learn.
Basically, people keep telling us how the school system needs to change, or a magic cure all for what new idea should be the core of out teaching programs, but the first and simplest thing we can do is to adhere to the age old wisdom of "you get what you pay for" and start paying more then the minimum we can get away with for educating the youth.
Extra: Also, I thing there are plenty of things wrong with the way the education system is run from the systematic standpoint, but thats another matter entirely.
Can't say I've ever heard anyone make the claim in #3.
Most conservative talking points center around this idea
What I learned with this video:
The actual untruths:
1- Exactly zero of any damage a person can suffer mentally or phisically is permanet.
Breaking a bone makes it stronger if it heals, and weaker if it's not held in place while healing. If it heals distorted, it will stay distorted and breaking a bone badly make it distorted forever. These are facts. Period.
2- A strong feeling is objectively true.
Nobody but religious peeps teaches that to younglings. Analysis of social constructs tell us what society actually is and it's not just a strong feeling. Depression's cure is not to break out of beliefs or "improve the thinking", depressive people knows exactly in what situation they are. What is irrational are the constant imbalances. Period
3- People are either good or bad.
We all are gray. Some lack some white. Some lack some black. Others are undistinguishable from a extreme. We are not wired for warfare, we are wired to care for the clan only, and making us all realize we are one big clan called humanity is the purpuse of encouraging diversity. Colleges do not teach that the highers are bad and lowers are good, but courses on politics, economy or society may teach about the -steps- walls the lowers need to deal with, some of which were put there by some of the highers. Period.
Bonus: we all learned to deal with offensiveness at young age. Even the protected kids. We either don't care, pretend to not care, care too much, care as much as needed or call for help if we can't deal with it. And there are bs out there not even you can deal with, requiring help or a form of coping untill it's gone. Period
I didn't read as many books about social stuff and can't name the main idea of many authors, but I know way more about real life than a studied old guy, it seems
Most excellent. I have been arguing these points for years with my family. They just call me an asshole and/or cold. I will share this video with them. Thank you. (Christoph bows graciously)
I agree with your family. I went to Catholic boarding school, led by Benedictine monks. There, I got all the anti-fragility training one could ask for, if you catch my drift. I suggest you learn a little empathy, before you espouse Jonathan Haidt's cruel neoliberal propaganda.
"We must always fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil that we must fear the most, and that is the indifference of good men." - Boondock Saints
Such a true quote.
Finally, someone on Big Think sensible.
When my son was being bullied at school we taught him strategies to stick-up for himself rather than informing his class teacher. The bullying eventually stopped (a bully actually wants to be stopped). There is too much emphasis on the victim rather than the bully. Find out more about the bully, why is he/she like this? Often they are sad lonely individuals craving attention.
Here's a better idea. Punish the bully. Hit him, beat him, give him detention, arrest him, expel him from the school, whatever.
If they're craving attention, why do they target the one child whose different?? Why don't they bully at random? Usually, bullies are children who are raised to be bigoted, violent, and arrogant.
I used to stop bullies myself as a kid -- typically with a solid object to the face. They didn't seem to appreciate it. 🤕 What wacky book did you get that tidbit from?
There's a difference between exposing your kids to the outside world vs oppressing kids with homework to force them to be obedient workers who don't think for themselves. The 2nd one doesn't make kids stronger, it makes them grow up and perpetuate the world's problems.
This is why I don't like generalized advice. It could be helpful or harmful depending on the interperetation.
Homework is oppressing kids? It forces them to be obedient workers who don't think? Wow...let me tell you something, princess: I'm 51 and one of my biggest regrets was not doing homework in school. Sure...I was smart enough to get away with not doing homework and still pass - but I wasn't smart enough to develop any marketable skills without doing homework. You can't get good at something without practice and homework is just that. But hey, you don't have to be an "obedient worker." You can just be a hippy loser and sponge off of people who actually give a damn. Or maybe you can flip burgers for a living. Won't that be nice?
@@DesertHomesteader "Wow...let me tell you something, princess" - You might get a better reception if you refrained from condescension and personal attacks. No need to try to insult people because they have differing views. Perhaps you should work on logical arguments.
@TheGerm24 - First, I don't really care about getting a better reception and I didn't ask for your help - but thanks for riding in on your high horse to save me. Second, everything I wrote is word-for-word what I would tell my own child or grandchild if they came to me spouting that garbage. Old people get to condescend to young people because they make stupid statements devoid of any wisdom. Welcome to the real world, snowflake.
You must be a kid
It’s not the homework’s fault. Modern education is not really about learning or sparking interest in some subject for further development or better understanding. Modern education is all about getting an “A” or similar passing grade and moving on to the next subject.
Most of my learning as an adult has been unlearning the lies of childhood. It’s really shocking what people just go along with and perpetuate because of the heard mentality and tradition . If people don’t get the time to stop and think about things like theology , philosophy, psychology….the hows and whys of life , to really ponder them for themselves and not just take someone else’s quick answer , if they don’t get the time to think and question then it is really hard to unlearn lies when you’re a stressed piece of the system so for many it’s simply easier to live the lie …..many willingly choose ignorance mistaking it for bliss.
knowing the evil we are all capable of committing is the first step in doing good, not evil... and it's not an easy thing to see. That's why the concepts of seeking redemption/forgiveness and giving redemption/forgiveness are the most powerful of all human qualities (in my opinion).
He makes a claim that some how some harassment as a child will make you develop better social skills. That is total nonsense. Bullying among children in school does nothing good. It ruins lives.
This.
People act like because it’s between children, bullying can’t be that bad. Honestly, people need to drop the “bullying” label and call it what it is, harassment and abuse.
Some types of “bullying” could get an adult months in prison, but when it’s with kids suddenly even telling the perpetrators to stop is “coddling” the victim, and the victim just needs to “learn how to stand up for themselves”
I like this guy, im going to buy his book
Are you a bot?
@@davidlove2457 No, are you?
beep boop
@@ElDuardo01 stupid robot.
A pleasant surprise coming from this channel. The "All people are good and bad" ideology however is only a technicality. It's mainly for those ignorant enough to think they're good and everyone against them is bad. However, this isn't a mindset to hold onto in the long run. Everyone isn't equal in morality, and it's not right to drag great people down for their few vices or excuse terrible people for their minor positives. Acknowledge all aspects, just don't give them all the same weigh.
Abstractly, I would say that your idea about weighting peoples behaviour works but only after people starting paying attention to the individual and not simply the categories they fall into e.g. male / female, black / white, gay / straight, left / right. I agree though that once you start paying attention to the individual person you can start to make judgements about them and even rank order them in your perceived list(s) of *insert value(s) here*. Unfortunately, people often rank other people before they get to know them. Stereotyping to a large degree helps us make faster decisions based on past experiences / impressions, which is necessary. We can never fully interpret all available information so we must simplify it. This can be wrong or skewed based on bias we have but be a fair and just judgement or feeling from the perspective of the individual and their experience. I think you are right that ignorant people generally rely on this stereotyping more than more intelligent, but maybe we are actually just saying ignorant people 'are those' who stereotype more?
Questions to ask yourself.
1. Is this person prone to harm others?
2. Is this person prone to think it is ok to take others property with out permission or compensation?
There may be more or better questions but this is a good start.
*_Peace if we can keep it_*
You should probably rewatch this video with the sound ON. You totally missed the point of his third idea. The good vs bad concept isn't an ideology, it's an evolutionary necessity. Your entire point is invalid.
"Who are we humans? What is our species? We evolved from small scale societies locked in struggle with other small scale societies. Human nature is tailored for intergroup conflict and tribal warfare..."
He goes on to claim, clearly contradicting himself, that we transcended this evolutionary necessity, but then he goes on to say that we reinstitute it in sports and schooling. We didn't transcended shit. Our in group vs out group mentality is as hardwired as is the imperative to eat and procreate.
These three untruths are indeed top of the list for debunking but also in the mix needs to be "Everything happens for a reason".
I've never heard of any of these "untruths." But I will say, "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger," is a terrible thing to say.
Some practices simply ought to be ended. It's one thing to suffer consequences for your actions, like breaking a bone if you're not careful, or getting sick with a disease, but you cannot equate that to something like being the victim of bullying. It's not the same thing because the mind doesn't behave like your bones or immune system. Victims of bullying aren't inherently tougher than kids who aren't bullied. They're more likely to become depressed, and more likely to react violently when provoked. Bullies, on the other hand, become enabled and narcissistic. The Columbine shooters were bullies and believed themselves to be better than everyone else. Bullying is something that should be discouraged and prevented entirely, it doesn't make anyone stronger.
Here's three more
1)Santa isn't real
2)God isn't real
3)Chances are you'll never own a house
Philitron128 are these untruths?
@@mysigt_ No, just raw uncensored truth
3) Depends where on the planet you are. Here in Ireland, most people eventually become a home owner in their lifetime. We currently have a home ownership rate of 77.3
My truth is different. That is ok, in fact it is good. 😉
the third option is untrue. it depends on where you live. we are a normal family in he Netherlands. no millionaires, normal jobs. in 10 years, if we don't die that is, our house is ours.
The last one is easier to break when you dont have certain dogma shoved down your throat.
I thought i would never find a video that explains the troubles of a human and how they make situations worse for themselves... finally can send this to the people that deal with self-conflictions so that i don’t have to explain it. Humans are sensitive, immature organisms that do not know how to look at their problems correctly.
Sounds like you have a few problems of your own. How can you save other people from drowning when you can't even swim?
By giving them life jacket, Sometimes just the reminder of simple but true things makes the life easier for a while.
Ben Simpson brother i‘m swimming trust me. I’m gracious that i don’t have problems to deal with unlike the people that do. So that’s why i give this style of advice out, because this video states true points. Emotional support is just the icing on the cake. You need a hearty base to support the icing. So realistic support (this video) is the best advice to give out.
Well here's one that I have never found to be untrue... Treat people like you want to be treated.
Great video! This is so important to understand. if you can figure out how to take a step back and control your emotions you'll have a way easier time. I'm in the process of learning this but already people keep telling me they appreciate that i don't get mad at them or i apologize if i was mad/unfair to them.
Sometimes when you're in a fight or a discussion you should really ask yourself : am i angry because of a different thing right now? is this fight about the topic itself or is it something personal between me and the other person? or in other words do i just want to win a fight to feel good and make the other person feel bad?
It's funny to see how people react if you apologize mid fight. they're like "wait..you were supposed to say something mean. i'm in fight mode. what am i supposed to do with all this rage now? " :D but it's worth it
Diversity is meaningless without fair treatment. Companies that claim to "love diversy" can be rife with discrimination.
*cough cough* bon appetite
Exactly.
Actually, there are plenty of studies on the long lasting effects of bullying at school. Kids immune systems get stronger with filth if they are well nourished and healthy. And not small newborns. Not if they are in chemotherapy either. Likewise, their psyche needs to be healthy and grown a bit in order to withstand bullying and other social challenges. Instead, a lot of kid's brains usually get absurd amounts of screen time, broken families, mentally ill caretakers, very little contact with nature and the outdoors, poor nutrition, little exercise... And we want those brains to be antifragile. This man lives in fantasy land.
Number 4: our society is normal, and a good job will help you. In reality our eco system is dying and politics and corporations lie to you, because they won't face the truth nor their crimes making matters worse.
KootFloris It depends on what you mean by "good job." The best money comes from finding a new way to appeal to the most self-indulgence. The truly good jobs, then, really don't pay that well, but they do probably provide purpose and meaning. That kind of job helps everyone.
What the hell does "Our society is normal" even mean? I have only ever heard that our society is exceptional. You sound a bit unhinged.
@@PoofyKittyPants I think he means that one of our big lies is that our society is normal for humans. Our society is a disaster for humans. It has been for about 12,000 years. We evolved as foragers living in small tribes. Our brains and bodies are still designed for that kind of life, not for the way we live today.
@@incognitotorpedo42 what is normal is suffering and death. Society holds that at bay. If you think foraging for food sounds like fun go walk into the woods and don't come back for a month.
The biggest lie we tell children - actually, we show it to them by protecting them, even if we never tell them explicitly - is the illusion that the world were a safe place.
I just recently found these. Of critical importance they are for everyone!