Understanding Confidence: Beyond the Binary of “more” or “less“
It’s a term thrown around often, in self-help books, motivational speeches, and even casual conversations. But what exactly is confidence? Is it an intangible force that some people possess while others lack, or is it an inherent aspect of every individual that remains unaffected by external circumstances? Let’s dive deep into this paradoxical phenomenon.
If one looks closely, the term has been constructed based on societal norms and standards. It is believed that certain behaviors, decisions, or characteristics project a sense of certainty, while others indicate a lack of the same. Over time, these beliefs have formed the structure we identify as confidence. However, considering the vast spectrum of human emotions and the varied circumstances everyone faces, is it valid to classify them under the binary of confidence and its lack?
For instance, a deer running from a predator is often acting out of fear. However, the very act of running, the determination to escape, indicates a level of confidence in its ability to survive. Similarly, when a person is fearful, that fear doesn’t necessarily negate their confidence. The act of acknowledging fear and responding to it can be viewed as an act performed with complete confidence in that particular emotion.
While it’s argued that confidence is unaffected by external situations, one can’t deny the impact of external validation on perceived self-worth. A student praised continuously may seem more confident than one who’s always criticized. But this brings forth another question: Is the confidence of the praised student genuine, or is it a facade built upon external validation? The underlying belief here is that true confidence remains unaffected by external factors. It is an internal compass, guiding one through life’s challenges. The student who seems less confident due to criticism might very well have an inherent belief in their abilities but chooses not to display it openly.
The intricate relationship between fear and confidence is captivating. While at first glance, they might seem opposing, a deeper introspection suggests they coexist harmoniously. As mentioned before, acknowledging fear can be an act of confidence in itself. Embracing one’s vulnerabilities, doubts, and fears can be seen as the highest form of confidence because it stems from self-awareness.
If we view confidence as neither a trait one can gain nor lose but as a constant presence, it reshapes our understanding. In this perspective, every act, regardless of its nature, is executed with full confidence. A person displaying apprehension is confidently apprehensive. A person in doubt is confidently doubtful. Modern society often categorizes confidence in degrees – more or less, high or low. This categorization restricts our understanding. When we say someone is “more confident,” we’re comparing their current state to a previous one or juxtaposing them against someone else. However, by acknowledging that every act is executed with complete alignment to a particular emotion or state of being, the need for comparison dissipates.
Confidence, in its true essence, is not about loud declarations or silent sufferings. It’s about recognizing and accepting the inherent completeness in every emotion, decision, and action. It’s about understanding that every response to a situation, be it with enthusiasm, fear, doubt, or joy, is done with utmost confidence in that response. If confidence is inherent, it would imply that any action performed in a state of fear, joy, or doubt is done with a level of assurance. In a crisis, for example, a hesitant decision to call for help is executed with as much confidence as a swift decision to solve the problem. This inherent nature of confidence, therefore, suggests that the concept is not binary but rather a spectrum, or perhaps beyond a spectrum—a state of consistent existence.
When we look at external circumstances affecting confidence, it becomes apparent that this so-called “influence” is transient. If confidence is genuinely inherent, then external factors may create an illusion of change but cannot alter its core. That said, constant external validation can create a clouded perception of self-worth, often mistaken for genuine self-confidence. The distinction between inherent confidence and externally-induced confidence is crucial for holistic understanding. If confidence is a constant presence, the degrees of “more” or “less” cease to have real meaning. It suggests that everyone, at any point in time, is fully committed to their actions or reactions, be it hesitancy or decisiveness. In such a framework, everyone is performing at their own level of 100% confidence tailored to the specific situation or emotion they are dealing with. Therefore, to say that one is ‘lacking’ in confidence is to misunderstand its inherent nature.
If every act is performed in complete alignment with the emotion or thought process governing it, it removes the need for comparison or valuation, which are tools the ego uses to identify itself. The notion of someone being “more confident” than someone else arises from a place of duality, from distinguishing the self from the ‘other.’ When one’s existence is in complete harmony with the intrinsic nature of confidence, these comparisons become irrelevant.
Can a decision be good or bad?
The concept of decision making and the parameters that define its goodness or badness are both fascinating and complex. When we take a decision, we hope for a certain outcome, and the real-world result of our decision is judged in relation to this expectation. Decisions are inherently linked with the consequences they bring, and we often label them as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ based on whether the outcome was favorable or unfavorable. But should this be the only measure of a decision’s quality?
Every decision, regardless of its scale or impact, is taken within a context. Factors such as personal beliefs, values, emotions, knowledge, past experiences, as well as our estimation of future events, all feed into the decision-making process. This intricate mixture of elements makes decision-making a highly individualized and subjective process.
Given this complexity, is it then possible or even fair to categorize decisions as definitively good or bad? And what are the parameters we should use to judge them?
One viewpoint suggests that a good decision is one that is well-informed, well-considered, and aligned with one’s core values and goals. From this perspective, the goodness of a decision lies not in the outcome it produces, but rather in the process by which it was made. An individual may take a decision based on the best information available, taking into account all possible scenarios and aligning the decision with their values. If the outcome is unfavorable, does that make the decision bad? Arguably, no.
However, another viewpoint posits that decisions are inherently tied to their outcomes. If a decision leads to a positive outcome, it was a good decision. If the outcome is negative, the decision was bad. This perspective is very results-oriented, focusing on the end rather than the means. But it fails to consider that outcomes are often influenced by variables outside our control and cannot be predicted with certainty at the time of decision-making.
Considering both these viewpoints, it becomes clear that the notion of good and bad in decision-making is not absolute. It’s subjective and contextual, relying on both the decision-making process (the means) and the resulting outcome (the end).
Let’s consider an example to illustrate this: Imagine a person deciding to invest their savings in a seemingly promising startup. They do their due diligence, researching the market, the product, the team, and even consulting experts. They make a well-informed and well-considered decision to invest. But despite all their thoroughness, the startup fails after a few years, and they lose their investment. Was their decision bad?
If we judge solely based on the outcome, we might say yes. But if we look at the decision-making process, we could argue that they made a good decision given the information they had at the time. This example highlights the complexity and subjectivity involved in labeling decisions as good or bad.
The question of accountability further adds to this complexity. When we hold someone accountable for a decision, we are implying that they had control over the decision-making process and its outcome. This notion of control, however, is not always reflective of reality. As we’ve noted, decisions are influenced by numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control.
That being said, there is an aspect of decision-making where accountability does play a crucial role. When individuals make decisions, they should be held accountable for ensuring that the decision-making process is as thoughtful, ethical, and informed as possible. This means they should strive to gather all relevant information, consider all possible options, and align their decisions with their values and responsibilities.
While we cannot control all factors affecting the outcome of our decisions, we can strive to make informed, deliberate choices that reflect our values and understandings. And in the end, it’s through the experience of decision-making, both its successes and failures, that we learn and grow.
The notion of decision-making as it intersects with personal development and growth forms a vital part of this discussion. Each decision we make, whether deemed as good or bad, influences our lives, shaping us into who we become. It’s essential to understand that every decision, regardless of its outcome, provides us an opportunity for growth and learning.
Every decision, even the ones with unfavorable outcomes, provide lessons that can be harnessed to make better-informed decisions in the future. This idea ties into the concept of ‘failing forward,’ where we view failures not as dead-ends but as stepping stones to success. If we are open to learning from our missteps, we can transform even ‘bad’ decisions into useful experiences that make us wiser and more resilient.
Now, let’s explore the concept of regret, which often intertwines with our reflections on past decisions. Regret can stem from believing we made a ‘bad’ decision, which led to an unfavorable outcome. While it’s natural to experience regret, dwelling on past decisions can trap us in a cycle of guilt and self-blame. A healthier approach would be to acknowledge the decision and its consequences, extract lessons from the experience, and then use these insights to inform future decisions.
A further consideration in decision-making involves understanding the distinction between controllable and uncontrollable outcomes. This concept, often termed as ‘circle of influence’ and ‘circle of concern’ by management gurus like Stephen Covey, can be very helpful in reducing the stress around decision-making. We can focus our energies on the areas we can control or influence, rather than on areas beyond our reach. This shift in focus can help us make more empowered decisions and develop a more constructive perspective on the outcomes of those decisions.
Let’s expand this understanding with another example: A mountain climber prepares to scale a peak. She trains rigorously, equips herself with the right gear, studies weather patterns, and plans her route meticulously. Despite all these careful preparations, she could be forced to abandon her climb due to unexpected weather changes. Was her decision to climb wrong? By focusing on the process, we could argue that her decision was sound, based on her preparation and knowledge at the time.
We can also apply these principles in everyday decisions, such as choosing a career, deciding on a diet, or even selecting a movie to watch. By focusing on the decision-making process and by being open to learning from each decision’s outcomes, we enhance our ability to make better decisions in the future.
So, is there relevance to good and bad in decision-making? Yes, but it is a complex, multi-faceted relevance that cannot be boiled down to a simple binary. It includes considering our values, the information we have at hand, the potential consequences, and the context in which the decision is being made. It’s also about understanding that decision-making is a skill that can be honed over time, and every decision, whether it leads to success or failure, contributes to that learning and growth.
Prayer – is it measurable ?
Prayer is an age-old human practice that transcends the boundaries of culture, geography, and faith. As we explore whether there is a measure of prayer, be it qualitative or quantitative, we find ourselves diving into the intricate layers of human spirituality, psychology, and the subjective experiences that weave the tapestry of our existence. In this exploration, we consider the motivations behind prayer, the outcomes of this practice, and the existential questions that propel human beings towards the realm of the divine.
Prayer, at its core, is a form of communication with a higher power, deity, or the universe, depending on one’s faith or personal belief system. It’s a practice steeped in ritual and tradition, manifesting in different ways across the world’s religions. Prayers may be expressed in silence, in spoken or sung words, through physical prostrations, or even via dance, as seen in some indigenous spiritual traditions. Some pray using prescribed words and formulas, while others engage in spontaneous, personal dialogues with the divine.
While a quantitative measure of prayer might seem straightforward – one could, in theory, count the number of prayers, their frequency, or duration – this approach fails to grasp the true essence of prayer. Prayer is fundamentally a subjective experience that eludes objective measurement. The “effectiveness” of a prayer isn’t necessarily proportional to the number of times it’s uttered or its length. It’s an act that holds significance beyond numbers and metrics.
The qualitative measure of prayer, on the other hand, poses a challenge due to its highly personal and subjective nature. Every person experiences prayer differently, which can be influenced by their beliefs, emotional state, intentions, and many other factors. The impact of prayer on an individual’s life, their sense of peace, or their connection to their faith are deeply personal matters that resist standard measurement.
However, some elements are often considered in assessing the qualitative “effectiveness” of prayer. These include the sense of peace and comfort it provides, its impact on one’s behavior or attitudes, and its ability to cultivate qualities like gratitude, compassion, and humility. Some also speak of experiencing a deep sense of connection or communion with the divine, which, to them, signifies a “successful” prayer. Nevertheless, these remain personal and subjective aspects that may vary significantly from person to person.
The reasons why people pray are as diverse as humanity itself. Some people pray to seek comfort, to express gratitude, to seek guidance, or to find inner peace. Others pray to foster a connection with the divine, to seek intercession for themselves or others, or as an act of worship and devotion.
Many individuals find in prayer a source of solace and strength. It provides a space to voice their fears, hopes, regrets, and gratitude, often bringing a sense of peace and clarity. It can serve as a means to navigate life’s challenges and uncertainties, fostering resilience and hope.
Prayer can also be a powerful tool for personal growth and transformation. It invites introspection and self-reflection, helping individuals to align with their values, cultivate virtues, and transform negative emotions. It can lead to improved relationships, greater compassion, and a heightened sense of purpose and fulfillment.
Regarding the question of whether people pray out of fear or belief in the unknown, or if they have an experience of the unknown, the answer is likely all of the above. The unknown, with all its mystery and uncertainty, has always been a profound trigger for human contemplation and spiritual seeking.
Some may pray because they fear the unknown – death, illness, misfortune, the cosmic scale of existence – and seek protection or comfort. Others pray not out of fear, but out of awe and wonder, driven by a desire to connect with the grandeur of existence that extends beyond the limits of human understanding.
There are also individuals who, through their spiritual practices, claim to have experienced glimpses of the unknown, encounters with the divine, or states of consciousness that transcend the ordinary. These experiences, often described as mystical or transcendent, may inspire a deepening of their prayer practice.
It’s crucial to acknowledge that the motivations for prayer and the experiences associated with it are diverse and complex, reflecting the profound complexity of human existence.
Abhishek Fanse 