Mental Strength

[ak667]

Mentally strong people solve problems. Mentally weak people exacerbate problems.

I wanted to put this down to clarify misunderstandings since, funnily, as out there as some of my thoughts are on various topics, this is the one which appears the most controversial. I think it's in part because I actually encourage this quality in both men and women, and perhaps some are imagining that I'm suggesting that both men and women become like John Rambo.

So to clarify, John Rambo is actually mostly a weak person by my account. He has an incredible talent for violence and going on killing sprees and has no fear of dying, but as a troubled and misunderstood soldier with PTSD and suicidal tendencies who barely communicates with people, he is not exactly a problem solver. He might be able to solve some problems if you drop him off in enemy territory and need lots of enemies killed, but drop him off in civilized society and he'd likely cause and exacerbate problems instead of solving them.

Mental Strength and Problem Solving

So let's use a couple of examples of what I consider strong and weak.

Weak: a man who is quarreling with his girl that he loves and wants, but in the process starts entertaining angry thoughts like, "She's such a whiny bitch!" And in doing so, becomes angry and might even say nasty things to her while escalating and escalating the argument. This is obviously making the problem worse, not better.

Strong: a man who avoids entertaining such angry thoughts. He stays calm and communicates and starts working out a solution with his girl in a way that leaves them coming out both feeling closer to each other and happier than they started. This man is a problem solver.

Weak: a person trapped in a fire who starts entertaining fearful thoughts like, "We're all going to die!" And in doing so, the person starts to panic and puts themselves and everyone around them in greater danger than necessary.

Strong: a person in the same scenario who might be afraid but starts thinking productively like, "This is a dangerous situation but if we stay calm and find an exit, we might be able to get through this." And in thinking productively this way, they counteract the fear and start guiding themselves and others to safety.

The Quality of Thoughts

All of this is fundamentally tied to the quality of the thoughts we have. Poor quality thoughts (as in counter-productive, weak) would be ones like "We're all going to die!" in any dangerous situation as opposed to higher quality (as in more productive, strong) thoughts like, "How can we make it through this alive?"

If people want to become mentally stronger, then the first thing I suggest is to recognize when we have very poor quality thoughts. They will generally fuel negative feelings like anger, sadness, despair, and fear. Catch ourselves in those moments and see if we can look at the same situation in a different, more productive way. If we can start to get hang of doing that, we can start to make much better, much more productive decisions that give us the desired outcome instead of constantly and impulsively doing things we soon come to regret.

Again this is a very valuable quality to possess for both men and women.

Crying and Tears

This is maybe where I get the most negative responses because when people ask if it's okay for men or women to cry a lot, I often give a roundabout answer questioning the quality of their thoughts as opposed to simply saying, "it's always fine!" I care little about tears but the thoughts behind them.

Is the person thinking in a very counter-productive way? "My work is boring, my life is shit, I should just die." If that's the way they are thinking that leads to those tears, and they're constantly accumulating so much needless stress from it, then I would say the thinking is very counter-productive and weak and should ideally be challenged to something more productive like, "How can I make my life better?" which would probably prevent the tears from forming in the first place.

If people feel the need to shed tears, shed tears. I wouldn't suggest to ever hold them back in favor of pride or ego or something to this effect. But if there are very counter-productive thoughts going on inside the person when they do this, then I would call it weak and would suggest, however gently, to try to grow stronger.

Sympathy and Help for the Weak

I also do not encourage bullying or teasing or being mean-spirited towards those who are weak in any context. That's probably not the mentally strong (as in solving problems) thing to do. That's likely a weak thing to do.

I do not use these words like mental weakness in any condescending way. I also have some cases where I'm still prone to be weak and think and act counter-productively from time to time. I figure most of us mortals have some area in our personal lives where we could stand to gain some more strength, and usually it's easier to develop strength in those areas when we have someone to aid us in those cases and help us develop strength by challenging us to think more productively.

However, weakness must be challenged, however tactfully and gently. You cannot simply take someone who thinks in a very negative and counter-productive way and be sympathetic in a completely agreeable way that confirms all their negative and counter-productive thoughts. That is not doing them a kindness and not helping them grow stronger. That is enabling and encouraging their weakness.

[James_R]

I do not see any controversy in the comments you make or positions you stake out. What I would add further is much you say depends on the circumstances. People are not linear and neither are situations, so what holds true in one moment will not necessarily be true the next. The mentally strong can fluctuate, as your John Rambo example points out. Rambo is strong when he is in his element; killing people but not when he's in a board room. I believe John Rambo as all people, is strong in some situations and not in others. You can try and be well rounded but it is a fact you cannot be all things to all people. This is why we need John Rambo to kill people and Carl Icahn to be a business leader.

[ak667]

Much agreed and that might be a failure on my part in communication in failing to emphasize the contextual nature of it. I tried to cover it just briefly by mentioning how I also tend to have weak points in some areas. I might have made some linguistic errors if I gave the impression that it's as simple as "strong person vs. weak person" absent any context.

Another misunderstanding I want to clarify maybe in a second take is that some people take my suggestion as though the goal is to become some mushy gentle type. And that's not what I intend at all either. I'm in favor of a very pragmatic approach -- whatever gets the job done. But clearly there are more productive decisions that aid the situation and help with the person's goals and ones that are outright destructive and counter-productive to those goals.

[ak667]

Main reason I oversimplified a bit with the John Rambo scenario and largely called him "weak" is just kind of because the point of this take is mostly to point to people who I suspect have misunderstood what I meant when I suggested mental strength. I don't think they would have taken offense as they did to the point of blocking me and calling me pathetic and so forth if they understood that I'm not suggesting to become like a John Rambo type or any stereotypical kind of "strong" macho figure that might be popular today.

That's not to exclude the strength of those types in certain situations, but I just wanted to blatantly make it clear that that's not what I mean by "mental strength".

[James_R]

I totally understood your point and thought you meant it was situational but for completeness and to add to the discussion wanted to add that point. Frequently I think the same as you but rather than saying mental strength, because it could imply (the opposite) a weak mind, I use the phrase 'intellectual rigour'. The reason I use that phrase is it carries none of the negative connotation. If you apply an intellectual rigour, you are thorough, careful, precise, and perhaps most importantly strict with your own mind to apply the attributes you mentioned across most every situation.

[ak667]

I see, and thanks for the contribution! :-) Maybe I should reevaluate the terminology. One of the reasons I'm kind of leaning stubbornly towards "mental strength" even though the idea has been tainted by popular, chauvinistic kind of imagery, is precisely for that reason.

When I was much younger I thought I was desired to be strong in every way I could, and I thought I was strong because I wasn't afraid to get into a fight, for example, and also as an adrenaline junkie, I did a lot of death-defying stunts and wasn't afraid to get physically hurt. But I wasn't strong. I was thin-skinned and had a quick temper; a perfect recipe for inviting lots of needless conflict in my life. And I was like that for a good time in large because I didn't even consider that "weak".

Even in striving to be stronger, I missed perhaps the most important type of "strength" there is, and just realizing what I was doing wrong was the biggest first step in starting to overcome some of those weaknesses.

[BeMuse]

meh... I wouldn't agree. There are shades of grey in every situation and ulterior reasons for certain actions that lead to deeper insights even if they cause temporary but reparable pain.

[ak667]

Could you provide an example? I kind of doubt we're in disagreement. If it causes temporary pain but, in the long run, you really felt like you did the best thing and, assuming you could rewind and repeat the situation with the advanced knowledge of foresight, would happily do the same thing, then I don't it's a weak thing to do.

None of what I think as "strong" would, say, eliminate getting into even a physical fight with someone *if* that appears to be the best decision at the time for you and anyone you else you care about. But if someone is constantly doing things they regret, possibly for the rest of their lives, then that's what I'm talking as counter-productive -- as in things that very directly go against their goals and desires in life.

[ak667]

Again using the very extreme example of a burning building, if someone feeds on negative thoughts like, "We're all going to die! It's hopeless!" and they panic and get themselves and others killed, then that's generally counter-productive to the person's goals unless their actual goal and desire is to die in panic and kill other people.

[BeMuse]

Like I said every situation is different so you have to evaluate it. Mainly the things I had an issue with is that it's not always advantageous to go directly into “repair mode” if it's over a relationship you really want. That could be a relationship with your girl, by pushing her further at times than you maybe should you can understand her better, her limits, and how she will really react when things are bad. If it’s over a business deal you really want, sometimes you take risks and push people harder than reasonable to get a better bargaining position… You don’t want want to deal from weakness. I’m just saying the straight path isn’t always the most wise nor does it always provide the best outcome for either side. There are ways to really flip awful situations and come out on top if you are willing to think. Sometimes it can be done with reasonably fair play, other times you have to get a little dirty.

[ak667]

I see. I think we agree there and that's a second source sometimes where I might have miscommunicated my intentions. I am not against raising your voice, even being belligerent, if that seems to be the right tool for the job. So a second misunderstanding I probably need to clarify is that I have no intention of suggesting that "mental strength" comes in the form of a pushover. There's no precise "image" I have in mind for what that entails. All I can say is that the person isn't constantly going to do impulsive things that outright damage their goals (including and perhaps especially their long-term goals).

[ak667]

Especially take an example of dealing with a spoiled child. I certainly wouldn't suggest to be very kind and sympathetic in such a scenario. They might need a very firm and hash tone of voice. That could be the most productive solution. So I'm very pragmatic in terms of what I consider "strength". There's no precise image attached to it or a precise set of guidelines dictating how we should behave. All I can say is that whatever actions we choose are not going to directly contradict our goals, at the very least.

[ak667]

Actually in that scenario I would generally consider a very compassionate stance and soft tone of voice towards a spoiled child a "weak" thing to do, assuming the parent wants them to grow up into decent adults. It would likely contradict that goal.

[BeMuse]

I think looks and a stolid voice can be a lot stronger than yelling with kids. Sometimes they will try to provoke you to get a rise out of you. For example when I was teaching I had this one goofball that would pretty much troll anyone. I just gave him a mean look and kept staring. He stared back like it was a staring contest and a joke at first, then he gave in and said “I can’t do it! He has jedi mind tricks!” and then he got back to doing his work and was good for the entire next week. Lol I didn’t have to say a word, I didn’t have to call his parents, because in that moment I was he “parent” and he knew the gravity of the situation and he fell in line.

[ak667]

I would consider that a "strong" solution in that case. If it works, it works! :-) I'm very pragmatic that way so I'm in favor of whatever tool works for the job. I should probably make a follow-up that clarifies this idea.

[fay23]

Great take and i must say as someone who is mentally weak I do try hard to avoid it although some days it's worse.

[ak667]

It's very difficult to do to challenge our own ways of thinking. I think most of us mortals are going to have stubbornness there in resisting attempts to think differently. But the revelation for me is that it boils to the way we think, which influences the way we feel, which influences the way we act.

My primary weakness as a younger man was that I was thin-skinned with a quick temper. That's a nasty, nasty combination because it meant that anything I found which bruised my delicate ego back then would quickly trigger a very hot temper. And that was a perfect recipe for inviting and escalating needless conflicts that could have been avoided and deescalated if I wasn't prone to such angry thoughts which often jumped to conclusions without questioning the nature of the situation further.

But I thought I was helpless because I thought it was about "controlling emotions". And I was like, there's no way I can do that. I could try to hold it in when I'm angry or upset but often [...]

[ak667]

[...] I would internalize so much stress doing that and work my way to an even worse outburst. So I was very weak that way and in particular, needlessly messing up relationships and also a bit of a trouble-seeker. I was a hothead.

And I didn't even think I was weak and also didn't think I could help. I thought anyone in my shoes would certainly be angry the same way as me given what this person said or did combined with the rest of my stressful day whatever. So I thought helpless but to be that way.

The main thing never occurred to me was to try to control not my emotions, per se, but my thoughts. If I was getting irritated at work and later my girlfriend said something I didn't care for or some stranger bumps into me, I didn't think to challenge all the negative thoughts that would occur in my brain which would ultimately make me angry. I never thought to question and challenge that.

If you can manage that to do that, you can start to make better decisions.

[ak667]

* ... didn't even think I was weak and also didn't think I could help [it].
* So I thought [myself] helpless but to be that way.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Emotional intelligence is important too. Many people overlook that.

[ak667]

Empathy is actually a critical part, in my opinion, of often aiding in making optimal, productive decisions. Anyone severely lacking in the ability to understand people's feelings, points of view, etc, is naturally going to have a huge gap in terms of the information they have which informs their decisions, even if they're attempting to think in a very productive.

I'm used that issue a lot as a software engineer. I work with lots of types with high IQs but maybe low EQs, so they miss the fundamental point that we're designing software not for robots for sometimes irrational, emotional types of beings.

[ak667]

* [...] even if they're attempting to think in a very productive [way].
* [...] designing software not for robots [but] for sometimes irrational, emotional types of beings.

[Northern_star]

this is BY FAR the most perfectly articulated and most interesting mytake i've read, it couldnt be more timely these days.
i just wish it could be longer.

[Koki11]

Well I agree with you there but not everyone thinks rational, will people really pay attention

[Anonymous]

So essentially people are mentally strong due to their mental strength.

[Selina_Kyle_]

Great Take! Very instructive and beneficial :-)

[Rangers]

Well that wasn't horrible

[Crankor]

Well its not wrong. Perspective is everything

[White_Widow]

Well said! :)

[Secretgardenblood]

Good take