Exploring depth and nature of mindset
Before exploring the nature of mindset, I reconciled with the fact that my mind is full of mindsets. And while I had little trouble accepting that I am riddled with mindsets, there was no telling whether or not I was questioning the right mindset to think about the nature of mindset. On the surface, I had a few thoughts on the subject, but they came to me just as any unwelcome thoughts about grabbing an untimely snack. But I did find a place to start.
Acknowledging that there is no escaping mindset, I grew impersonal to my beliefs and started inspecting them for their vanity and demerit. Such an inspection made me feel like an unwanted guest in my own keep (my mind). And despite staying put, I suffered a sense of loss; of precious something that once belonged to me.
This sense of loss from the above exercise reminded me of a clay vase I once owned. It had a tan round belly and a long, narrow neck, and looked almost like a muddy teardrop. I thought of the day when it tipped over and broke. While reminiscing the loss of this vase, I could discern how precious mindset can be.
I could see how beliefs that set a stage for mindset continue to grow more delicate in imagination, whether we like it or not. And the longer they survive, the harder it is to part ways, and greater the pain when they fall apart.
The self rests in mindset
Fundamentally, through beliefs, the mind creates its identity; beliefs assemble and form the I, awakening a sense of self. Soon our edifice takes control of our senses, and we no longer believe what we see, but we see what we believe. Think for a moment, what is same-sex marriage to an orthodox christian, or what causes racial prejudice?
Mindset above all is pivotal in navigating everyday situations and performing everyday transactions, because they don’t change every second. We can be passive participants in many situations without jeopardising our position. Conventional mindset around profit and loss is understood as a means to seduce profit and avoid loss respectively. But such mindsets also notoriously breed callousness.
By underscoring vile outcomes of having a mindset, the goal is not to axe every belief in the forest of mindset until the last one, like the original sin, is crucified. The aim is to identify and dismiss beliefs that do not contribute to our well-being, and naturally make room for the ones that do.
When we think about a certain idea, the stream of thoughts that occurs is not necessarily made of thoughts that are causal or universally consistent. Every thought is forced through a prism of belief that illuminates an understanding, which influences subsequent thoughts and behaviours. For example, a thought of failure forces one to work harder, and pushes others in despair.
The understanding arises seamlessly, dodging scrutiny, and reinforces a sense of self. The seventeenth century English philosopher, John Locke, explains in An Essay Concerning Human Understanding that, “the understanding, like the eye, whilst it makes us see and perceive all other things, takes no notice of itself; and it requires art and pains to set it at a distance and make it its own object.”
By narrowing our interest on the art and pains of scrutinising our understanding, we could turn our attention to the art of practicing mindfulness, which can alleviate pains of arresting beliefs by reminding us that they are transient; that they come and go.
On origin of beliefs
If we could discover how beliefs come into being; what inspires us to subscribe to a rationale while others disregard it; how do we come to agree with anything at all, perhaps it would be easier to create a more inclusive society. But the origin of beliefs and our propensity to accept a rationale are linked to not free-will but genetics, environment, and chance. We can make the same argument about our thoughts.
This lack of free-will can be liberating. If we could be convinced that we are not authors of our beliefs; that we are a warehouse of thoughts and ideas that we don’t produce, we enable ourselves to identify ideas that have the capacity to serve us without getting attached to them.
But it is ludicrous for some to think that we are a storehouse of thoughts and beliefs, and to think that we don’t have a free-will-after all no one is really forcing you to read this article against your will, so there has to be some degree of free-will.
In his book Essentialism, Greg McKeown discusses distressing effects of holding two contradictory beliefs at the same time: “I cannot do this,” and “I have to do this.” Faced with this dilemma in a professional setting, confessing that we cannot do a given task threatens our reputation. And to be forced to do the task, knowing that we cannot do, may induce anxiety. This incapacity to choose is called learned helplessness.
“When we forget our ability to choose, we learn to be helpless. Drip by drip we allow our power to be taken away until we end up becoming a function of other people’s choices-or even a function of our own past choices.”
Greg McKeown
The idea of free-will is that when we have candidates for thoughts to choose from, they essentially come to us without us knowing. But once we have them, we have the opportunity to make an informed choice. That is the limit of free will.
As the genesis of beliefs lurks in shadows, the practice of being mindful about what we believe is pivotal in guiding our actions to rational ends. While most mindsets manifest into actions, consequences can inform corrections. An act of being mindful is not strictly a precautionary measure. Mindfulness works on all turns of the journey. Being mindful about not just our actions, but the outcomes of our actions can also help engineer a remedy.
I do not wish to go ahead of myself while trying to inspect the nature of thoughts and beliefs by bringing in some degree of objectivity to their obscure origins. Perhaps to sit in our ignorance is sometimes unavoidable, but it’s alarming to grow comfortable while we sit there. So any short-sighted objectivity I may have brought to this topic can be mindfully perceived as a sign of discomfort (if it helps, please remind yourself that I am still a grieving owner of the broken vase).
Is everything determined?
Like the elements that make anything on the internet trend wildly are too esoteric to be determined, our beliefs are established through similar ambiguity. People who believe in ideas like life after death; socio-economic equality are not credulous. But something innate in them makes them collectively cling to such ideas, and tip these ideas into cultures. These ideas have little to do with evidence, but they cash in on our mind’s predispositions.
We can be inclined to agree with certain ideas; we can be predisposed to be more optimistic or pessimistic, but outcomes of such predispositions cannot be determined.
Our mind hopscotches around different attitudes depending on the demands of the situation, like the chemicals in the brain (serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine etc.) play sea-saw to maintain some semblance of sanity.
It is silly to think that every situation, and chemical reaction in the body, is determined. Moreover, mind’s susceptibility to certain beliefs, which dodge our rationale and cling on to something innate, should inspire us to be more aware.
For someone who confuses the argument on free-will with heartless determinism, and submits to nihilistic views, here are a few lines by Locke that should wake you from your dogmatic slumber:
“If we will disbelief everything, because we cannot certainly know all things, we shall do muchwhat as wisely as he who would not use his legs, but sit still and perish, because he had no wings to fly.”
John Locke
Betting mindset against speed of change
We are in an information glut, trying hard to catch up with the speed of change. To be conscious of information gap between generations is getting harder with the proliferation and sophistication of internet technologies, and beliefs are being tested and rendered obsolete in record time.
However, on the contrary, resolves on abortion, LGBT rights, equal opportunities for all sexes, etc. are perpetually left hanging by legislative monoliths. Political benefits for stalling these resolves preserve beliefs that are morally corrupt, protecting the identities of people who hold such beliefs and show up at critical discussions with biases.
A possible explanation to this dichotomy is that the speed of change is relative. Reforming ideas in the field of finance, and applied science are tested too readily, while in the field of social science, politics, and sociobiology these ideas are met with, if not hostility, criticism.
Perhaps the escalating speed of change is rightly weeding out beliefs that rob whatever knowledge the present has to offer, and It is better to acknowledge that the mind struggles with new information about the self and readily disagrees with it. We could warn ourselves of this disagreement, which doesn’t allow intuition to expand its horizon, and raise our consciousness to understand phenomenons that are otherwise hard to comprehend.
This blog has an about-page with my picture in it. If you can take a closer look at the picture, it hardly reveals any important fact about me. To make it easy, I can tell you that I am a thirty-year old living in India, and you can relate to me whatever general facts you might know about thirty-year olds, and people living in India. But if you can step back and think of me as a fellow being, you might know more about me than I do.
Similarly, exploring the depth of mindset may not always be the best way to gain knowledge about the self and optimise our behaviour. Taking a step back and not identifying with mindsets, which fail to encourage collective harmony and our well-being, can be a reliable anchor for the self. Maybe the nature of the answers in the depth of mindset is unknown to our mind and therefore remains incomprehensible. Or, maybe the depth of mindset has discernible answers, but we are crippled by our false beliefs.
Originally published at https://isflowing.com.
