THE REWARDS OF NEGATIVITY
ByWilliam Cottringer, Ph.D.
"Positive people live their lives like there are no tomorrows; negative people live life like it will go on forever but wish it wouldn't." ~The Author
You really don't have to have a Ph.D. in clinical psychology to explain why some people are positive and some are negative. Human behavior?positive or negative?is very predictable. Both get rewarded and so they continue until they don't get rewarded.
If you want to undo something, all you have to do is know what the rewards are and take them away. The trouble is that these rewards may have gone on so long that the habits in thinking, believing and expecting have often become entrenched, invisible and nearly impervious to change.
Just in case you have forgotten all the rewards or positive purposes of negative thinking and behavior here is a brief review of an even dozen such rewards and believe it or not they are quite as sarcastic as they may sound.
1. Negative people are a warning sign for the rest of us as to how not to be; they are serving a valuable positive purpose in this way and such simultaneous polar opposites can be addicting like the pain and pleasure of heroin.
2. Negative behavior lets you off the hook for being more responsible and diligent, which can seem like harder work, even when it is actually easier; illusions are also addicting.
3. Negativity explains away all the adversities, burdens and problems in life in one clean and easy swoop; and such simple cures are valuable prizes one doesn't quickly volunteer to give up.
4. Negativity is a great place to be when you experience something positive in such stark contrast that you can't help but notice and enjoy it more than ever (the negativity).
5. Negativity is more comfortable and less disruptive because it doesn't lure you into having to be more negative because just a little is plenty enough, not at all like being positive and successful and getting trapped into the perpetual chase for more and more.
6. There really are only a few skills that are necessary to continue negativity and they are easy to master (you just have to invest more energy in applying these skills), unlike the overwhelming plethora of optional skills for being positive.
7. There are probably as many negative people as there are positive ones (maybe more?), so 'misery loves company' rules and reinforces, quite effectively.
8. Negativity can easily flavor positive things into being viewed and experienced as negative and so, many positive events may be remembered and subsequently reinforced as negative.
9. Negative events are easier to see and feel, usually being more concrete and tangible than 'lucky' positive ones and the brain prefers the real to the abstract.
10. Research says that up to 70% of what we see and hear today has a negative spin on it and that is a lot of environmental reinforcement for negativity.
11. There seldom seems enough negativity going on to make someone uncomfortable enough to notice it, even though everyone else does but we all know that criticism just serves to continue something, not change it.
12. Subtle negativity, which may be the most impervious form, seems to be closer to being realistic than looking so far ahead to unfamiliar, unrealistic positive thinking.
Now on top of these powerful rewards, negative thinking and acting is much harder work than being positive and so the negative rewards are much stronger and reinforcing that the ones to being positive. Stronger rewards make stronger habits that are harder to break.
However, let's not get too negative here. There are at least two effective, positive ways to 'move mountains:' (a) climb them, one step at a time, and look down (b) look up at them and move one rock at a time until your view is eye-level. What is required here, to change negative behavior, is to slow down to the speed of thinking (which is pretty fast according to my calculations, so it isn't as easy as it sounds). Once you can discipline yourself to think about your own thinking, you can begin to catch yourself with your hand in the cookie jar. Then you can start analyzing the rewards you are getting to determine if they are what you want to help you feel the way you want, or whether you really want to feel differently, which requires you to question your negative thinking when it happens.
The trouble is we seem to go through life always wanting what we don't have or wanting more of what we do have if we like it. Fortunately we eventually see the folly of wanting things for external reasons or ulterior motives and concentrate more on doing something because it feels intrinsically right and good all by itself. That translates to learning to want what you have and appreciate it and it becomes easier to let go of what you have than what you don't have. But that insight doesn't come until after you start noticing what negative thoughts you may be having and the connection they have to the results you get in what you are trying to do. This is a big twisted slinky to unravel and it just takes time, discipline and patience and maybe a friend to reinforce your right efforts.
William Cottringer, Ph.D. is President of Puget Sound Security in Bellevue, WA, along with being a Sport Psychologist, Business Success Coach, Photographer and Writer. He is author of several business and self-development books, including, You Can Have Your Cheese & Eat It Too (Executive Excellence), The Bow-Wow Secrets (Wisdom Tree), and Do What Matters Most and "P" Point Management (Atlantic Book Publishers). This article is an excerpt from an upcoming book Reality Repair Rx. Bill can be reached for comments or questions at (425) 454-5011 or bcottringer@pssp.net
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 91
This hits home with me. I've been describes as negative at times. I don't consider myself as a negative person. Rather, I see myself as being realistic and not being naive and having false hope in certain situations. Sure, have hope, but don't lose site of what could very possibly happen. Also, looking at things from a different perspective (or a negative perspective as I've been accused of) gives one an all around view of things. Having a certain amount of negativity isn't a bad thing, necessarily.
I liked your quote, too. It's so true. I live life like it will last forever. However, I do not want it to last forever. It's not meant to.
sort of unwarranted, at least in some cases. There are
other dimensions to negativity, just as there are to
positivity.
For instance the leader who just keeps exuding confidence
make people feel good, but often delays pushing for
important change whereas a negative person can incite
some change.
Energy is potential for change, and i would not more
want to remove all negative energy than i would want
to cut my electrical power in half but shorting out the
negative cycle of the AC wave.
Could you define what you mean by negative for me
to take this comment into account, or do you disagree?
I consider myself a positive person but I see why we need negativity.
I'm positive you made both my and Williams point at the same time.
E.M. is saying exactly what I am thinking. I can't count the number of times my realistic lifestyle has allowed me to avoid useless collisions because of positive blinders.
But maybe I'm being negative.
The only thing I can think of to do at this point to avoid your harrassment is to ask William to delete any of our posts that he thinks is irrelevent to the discussion, with my thanks.
If you want to continue to attack me, do it in public where you believe I attacked you, or through email and leave other people out of your issues.
Inspiring and food for further thought.
Who is the judge of any of it?
If you think you are surrounded by thieves, you will be robbed. If you think you will fail, you will more often than not.
Positive people see the goal and launch the ball, see the goal and take one step at a time, expect the best and get it more often than not.
Old adages are old for a reason, they carry truth from generation to generation for those for that pay attention. What you sow you reap, as you believe, you receive…….
My glass is half-empty and there's a line at the drinking fountain.
At least my glass is half-full.
(gulp)
But of course it's all very interesting. I noticed bruce's question hasn't been answered yet. What exactly is negativity?
I particularly liked your Item Number Twelve. I perceive folks who are always cautioning children to Be Careful, watch out! to be critical and negative. The warning never helps, imo, and only makes a child more fearful and full of self-doubt.
LeeAnn D. sees herself as being realistic and not being naive and having false hope in certain situations. But I say, "Go for it! Be bold! False hope is sometimes the only hope there is, don't pop my bubble, baby."
I definitely like holding a polyanna-bent outlook on life. It's served me well.
Oh, what's the use...
My glass is half-empty and there's a line at the drinking fountain.
At least my glass is half-full.
At least your glass isn't shattered in the floor like mine. I like my negativity. I am never disappointed or unpleasantly surprised. I am not usually caught unprepared for the worst case scenario. Once in awhile I am pleasantly surprised.
> Give your attention to what you are for, not what you are against.
My reaction to why people are negative is in the
word - reaction. I think most activity of our selves
and our brain is "reaction", ie. driven by some outside
stimulus. Whether it is a positive thing like free ice
cream, or a negative thing like a scorpion in your shoe
we are perceived by our reactions to it and the reactions
we induce in other people because of it.
Since it is presidential season one thing all the candidates
since Jimmy Carter have learned is that need to be upbeat
about American. Jimmy Carter said rightly that there was
an American malaise, while Ronald Reagan talked about
city shining on the hill. There is not a dime's bit of difference
in the two to me, I don't need a President who tells me
pretty lies, so I often have a tough time with the whole
concept. ... why I asked my question above ... thanks
for notiving Susan.
I find the pop psychology aspect to pat answers like
this "be positive" thing are so that we get programmed
to blame people for problems they have. Poor people
are miserable and not happy, so we figure out a really
deceitful way to make them responsible for it .... they're
negative. So, that is why they are poor and miserable.
Of sick people ... they only got sick because they are
negative. It is a way of turning people into objects,
and those objects must be happy all the time or they
deserve negative consequences.
I read some books called "Nickeled and Dimed" and
"Bait and Switch" by Barbara Ehrenriech who talks
about what the world looks like from the aspect of
the poor. And that is a lot of it. They go to apply
for jobs and they are given psychological tests that
find out how positive they are, how bubbly, how
cheerful, how extroverted.
At the same time, I worry that positive people are really ignoring reality sometimes. Its alot easier to act happy than it is to, for example, face the ugliness& sadness in the world, and actually worry enough to do something about it.
I frequently find positive people have sad people around them....people whose reality has been over looked in the name of positivity.
But I dont wanna be too negative.....i think thats life!
Oh well, I say. I'm pretty comfortable with who I am, though; so I guess my lot has been cast by the hoards of Pollyannas of the world. So be it. I think it's easy to say being negative, or being realistic is 'easier' than taking a 'positive' view... but I think it's also easy to make sweeping generalizations about people and the effect they have on one another.
We are all who we are... products of our pasts and our environments. Take it or leave it I say. I'm not going to stand there and pretend everything's shiny when it isn't. I'll enjoy what there is to enjoy and then feel wholly free to lament and grump about the things that aren't ideal, there's not a shred of shame in expressing it.
C'est la vie, mes amis. Deal with it.
I try to take each day as it comes, hoping for a change for the good, that maybe I'll win the lottery and my fears will be over with. But no, it doesn't seem to be happening and things just keep getting worst. I should have planned for the worst.
I guess the negative has taken me over completely now. Especially with the way this country is going. Lots of Negativity, how else can one think?
Readers Who Bought This Argument Also Bought:
Yes! Absolutely. Speaking as a positive person, I regularly ignore reality. But that does not equate to not facing the ugliness and sadness in the world. And happily, I don't need to resort to worrying in order to prompt me to do something positive about these unfortunate circumstances.
Was it bruce who mentioned that negativity or positivity was (all) about our reactions to situations? Yes, again. I speak only for myself, as an optimist, but when faced with an obstacle, I like to jump in and solve it. My husband, an acknowledged pessimist, prefers to dwell in the angst of it until coming up with a resolution.
There are pros and cons to either action. It's not a competition.
LMAO! This is pretty good "stuff", I think. Then again, I'm a pretty negative (realistic) person by nature, so screw off, I think! ;) Is it wrong that I am this confused?
I like that.
Positive takes the 3 P"S just the opposite--good things are personal, permanent and pervaisive whereas negative ones aren't that way. Bill C.
Speaking of taking immensely negative situations and turning them into positive thoughts, steps and solutions; you should read this piece by Tom H:
Turning Point
Tom is one of the best and brightest of Gather's new stars and this was his first offering. I think you two will get along very well.
> it right--negativity is when you interpret positive
> events as being impersonal, short-lived and non-
> pervaisive, whereas you interpret negative events
> as being personal, permanent and pervaisive.
That definition works for me to see what you're
trying to say.
I think though that it is kind of a mind trick. For
example, would we like to be around people who
good things are happening to right at the moment,
or would be prefer to be around people who are
having bad experiences.
Obviously, for several reasons, I think most people
would say they would rather be where good things
are happening. Would you rather be around someone
who just got a new car, or someone who was just
in a car accident?
But why? I think it is a product of our minds. We
may associate good things happening to someone
who is "positive" with good things happening to
us.
Alterntively, someone who has had bad things
happen to them we might be afraid of because
we believe it might rub off.
I think this is mostly a consquence of the
associative style of our brain's memory workings.
So, it is something advertisers notice when they
want to sell things, instead of telling you about
the product, the world on giving you a good
experience. They want to make you laugh,
or feel good.
So ... what does that have to do with how
good the product is. They are in a sense
brain-washing you based on something
below your level of conscious awareness.
This is what I do not like about positivism,
it is very easy for someone who does not
care about anything but themselves to
cultivate a "winning" positive personality,
there are thousands of books and articles
about it.
Is it negative for me to be so mistrusting
of positive people. I don't think so, I try to
not judge about negative-positive, I try not
to be thrown off by false-postiivism, but it
takes careful examination and reflection about
what is going on to really know.
I realize you are not saying be falsely-
positive ... at least I hope you are.
The most positive way I can interpret what
this article is saying is reminding people
who are realistic that unconscious mannerisms
can have an effect on other people, like
body language.
The real test of character is to stand tall during adversity with the hope that this approach will take you to a better place. Bill C.
I actually do know people who do just that, but I've never thought of them as "negative"--more like depressed, anxious, having low self-esteem--things like that. Do you think that's what most people mean when they talk about "negative" people? Or do they mean the folks who point out what is wrong with, say, a simplistic solution they're suggesting? Because that's the context in which I hear the phrase most of the time.
Depression is an illness, not 'negativity'. The sooner people understand that, the better. It's not right to categorize people suffering from chemical imbalance as people who are 'negative'.
Am I being negative here? Am I a negative person? :-)
I believe we all get a long better when we present negative feedback or interpretations more nuetrally without being a hostile, cynical, disagreeable grouch.
Actually we are all getting off the basic purpose of this article--it was meant to be an explaination of why it really isn't that easy to be positive in what you are trying to attract in the LOA of "The Secret" hype. But I do think we have alowed workplaces and other situations to slip out of balance, being part of much more negative emotionality (anger, blaiming, criticizing, insensitivities, bullying, worrying, complaining, etc.) that positive emotionality (feeling good, inclusion, being cooperative, taking positive action to make things better, etc).
I guess categorizing a person as negative is about the same as trying to really understand what a "Christian" is. Too broad of a term to carry any depth of meaning.
The three Ps, "personal, permanent, and pervaisive [sic]," can be summed up in two words, "pathological" and "paranoid." If that's the case it means that a very small number of people have it and they're very unlikely to be helped by learning of a "positive approach."
Aniko points out that this kind of mindset could come from depression. Sometimes it could. Talk therapy or, the latest mental health fad, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, aren't going to be much help either.
Bill, you've got to be kidding - "overly flavored negative personality disorder"? Is this in DSM IV?
It's off-the-cuff pop psychology like that that makes it hard for those of us who aren't already in your choir to take you seriously.
If you think this is negativity, you may be right. But I think it has an important role to play in this discussion.
A person is more likely to disregard input if it is perceived
as coming from a negative place. Input may be positive or
negative, either way valuable, but if we turn off because
"negative" queues, because as was mentioned the person
might be upset or depressed.
Maybe ignoring emotional queues from the sender and
the listener being more neutral might be more accurate,
do not get sucked into positive flattery, or negative
depression either way.
Notice I've said everything there without using "positive" or "negative"--fuzzy words that carry little more meaning than vague emotional connotations here while relying on a false association with the precise scientific/mathematical use of those words. This was my main point. The Law of Attraction--I won't even go there.
This was my favorite line. I'm assuming you include only things in the negative, since it would be positive to seek education, patience, etc. Do you have any idea why some of us are born not wanting more while others don't seem to ever get it? I'm sure parental influence must play a big part, but I've seen children raised by the same parents turn out opposites.
I've noticed that some of the men who do this are not negative people. I have one man in mind who others think a tyrant, at work and in social circles, but those of us who know him behind the scenes know that he is optimistic, confident, and happy. I think he gets what he wants on both sides. Does that prove your point? I just talked myself in a circle.
Great article. One more thing: Happiness is a choice!
> usually a very unlikable characteristic that
> repels people. I
Maybe I do not care about being liked in certain
circumstances?
I should not have to be liked, or be white, or be
male, or be rich, to be heard, or have someone
agree with me because they think there is a profit
in it ... we run our country on juries and votes, and
this positivity thing may make people feel better
but I think it lowers the bar for membership in a
society and makes participation more difficult,
after all those with legitimate grievances always
appear negative.
useful one in the discussion. But not everyone has the
skills or the time or the expertise to make their points
"positively". If we blindly accept the postive-negative
dichotomy as true, we then make the world less
responsive to pain and problems.
maybe a good example is a baby ... a crying baby is
really negative, but the baby is crying out in hope
that someone will relate to it and understand beyond
the crying that it has a problem ... so it is with
negative people or situations.
Many times, negative events are things like war, poverty, job loss, walking in on your spouse in bed with someone else, car accidents, your child being addicted to drugs, cancer, losing your home, or a friend's suicide. The list goes on. It's reality. And with it, comes trauma in varying degrees. And, we grieve whatever the loss may be. In my mind, there is a natural course of a grieving process that goes along with what life throws at us. It seems to me that to minimize it or to feign a positive attitude; even to ourselves, causes more harm than any good that could come of it. It becomes escape and denial and we never learn decent coping skills. I would much rather go through to the other side of the negative event and know that I've chosen people in my life who will understand any negativity coming from me when they see or hear it.
The other thing is that the feeling of failure and turmoil that you speak of can be very effective when it means that someone who really needs to change is the one feeling it. Those with addiction problems won't change until they hit bottom. And they won't hit bottom without feeling a great deal of negativity. To minimize the effects of their behavior on our lives in an effort to remain positive, only serves to diminish the ability to establish the real boundaries that we need in order to deal with them. I would consider it disrespectful and dishonest.
There is another facet of this negativity subject. There are times when there is a need for it. Many times positive change isn't brought about until there is a great deal of negativity thrown at that which needs to be changed. To find an example of that, all one needs to do is recall The American Civil Rights Movement.
his case in a postive way ... then what? Should a black
person need to be a MLK in order to be heard?
> the defensive barriers--conveying things like
> gneralized criticism, dishonesty, rudeness, superiority,
> control, harsh judgments and those sort of things
> that make people defensive.
But blind positivism can disarm and attack someone
as well as negativism and in a way is ever more
insidious ... at least mostly you can tell when negativism
is real.
Example, was Bush on the Iraqis during the war.
He charmed his way right into war. Of the Republican
"positive" framing of their negative actions, pro-life,
blue-skies intitiation, global climate change,
no-child-left behind ... I feel suffocated in positivism,
and frankly sometimes relieved to get some good
old fashioned negativity.
MLK stuck to his guns about the non-violence. When those who chose violence got the upper hand, the message was lost on people. In fact, those who didn't want to see change pointed the violence as an excuse not to do anything. Negativity just doesn't work.
saying violence is justfied against people who are
negative.
I can see where the social stabilization this
would create would be evolutionarily valuable,
but is really kind of a hideous thought today,
when we are supposed to be advanced rational
beings.
They did studies about apes in a cage, where
on ape had all the food, and the other ape
had nothing. The ape with the food did share
his food, but if the other ape got annoying,
ie. negative, his altruism wore thin.
What we are dealing with here--the positivism vs. negativity thing--is a divergent problem that really doesn't have a zero-sum outcome...all we can do is strive to reach a healthy balance when we get too far out of balance (my preference is to lean in the direction that gets the best results for me)...meaning we can be too blindly positive just as too negative.
We usually get what we think, do and expect and if we don't like what we get from doing these things in a certain way, then maybe change should be at the top of our agenda.
If we are as happy and successful being engative then that shouldn't be a problem for anyone.
I am trying to make one important point--being positive is not easy until you understand the rewards of being negative. Bill C.
A primary "positive" purpose of negativity is to make us aware of what might be "wrong," which needs "righting." But continued negativity about the negative thing, event or interpretation only makes it worse and resistive to change. The only approach to changing something that is negative and destructive (or unproductive), is to build upon what is good and right about it (in fact there is a whole system that has been developed from this idea to resolve conflicts and help relationships and organizations to achieve forward motion and more success--called "Apreciative Inquirey," which has been going on behind the scenes of the postiive psychology movement for decades. My church (Episopal) is using it to get bast the major divisions of the Anglican conflict of homosexuality.
Not to get overly religious on you all, but Jesus was my hero as far as leadership skills and wisdom go--His method of dealing with negativity was inclusion (positive) rather than exclusion (continued negativity). I sense this appraoch is the best, from the depths of my being. Bill Cottringer
heard referred to as institutionalization. A new process
or behavior you want people to adapt for some reason.
Now ... you, and perhaps Joe are talking about behavior
modification. There is a book about training Killer Whales
that really opened my eyes about this and what
positive feedback is all about.
How do you train an animal who does not understand
complex consequences. Many of us have been trained
in very negative ways when we were young through
negative feedback, such as spankings or punishments.
This book uses Killer Whales to make a point that
imposing negative consequence with an animal can
get you killed. Using negative feedback with humans
induces all kinds of warped information processing,
and I think this article is trying to get at that.
When Killer Whales they use only positive feedback
out of necessity, but then generalize that anyone
learns better with positive feedback.
I think we are only reactive against negative stuff
because so much of American culture is about
negative stuff, and negative stuff being falsely
put into a positive bundle can called positive.
Have you ever heard of this marine mammal
training applied to people before?
Tammy-- of course people who are blindly optimistic and positive are very annoying. I prefer a blance leaning in the direction of being positive...but more than anything, trying to look for positive outcomes of negative events and trying positive approaches to fix negative things that are obviously destructive and harmful.
Bill C.
I too worry about the positive manipulators, but like you I see through their transparency...If I do, why am I fearing that others don't? I personally hate all the pornography smut I get in junk mail, but I think so many other people feel this way too, that it will eventually peak and fizzle out...but I guess that hopefulness is part of my leaning towards having a more optimistic viewpoint about eventual outcomes, given enough time.
The main dilemma in life is how to love someone who is shooting fear bullets at you? But if more people would not put out so much negative, toxic energy in the atmoshere, we might make so headway on solving violence and other angry solutions....
when the ultimate solution is for us all to spedn some time..."Know Thyself" Smartest two words ever spoken. If I know what my feelings are telling me (can you feel good about being angry, violent, huring others, milseading others, etc??) I have my answer that is the world's answer.
RE Iraq...Our world polictics and mass media express of values needs re-examining and re-adjusting. The terrorists need to be more realistic to understand that they really do have an obsolete view of America and what we stand for (because it has changed and matured with our two-hundred years of the democracy experiment), and that violence (ultimate punishment) doesn't work to change anything. It only geets supressed and goes somewhere else.
Both sides just should stop taking themselves so seriously and shed some pride tonage and 'Know Thyself' well enought o know what they are right and wrong about and get on with using their higher capabilities--to help assure a win-win outcome for all in the world of abudnance (positive emotionality, material wealth, genuine success, peace of mind, wholeness, etc.)
Bill C.
> is shooting fear bullets at you? But if more people would
> not put out so much negative, toxic energy in the
> atmoshere, we might make so headway on solving
> violence and other angry solutions....
Will ... have you ever heard of sticks and stones? Bottom
line it is the responsibility of the receiver to determine
the value of what is coming to them accurately
AND
to express themself accurately as well.
Your article seem to be minding someone
else's business when it tells them how to
behave. Because you cannot tell someone
how to behave, that is something that evolves
in each person according to their genetics
and experience. You can objectively let them
know facts, which I think is the postive part
of your article, and hope they make the best
of it, but lots of people are not ready or able
to hear that.
But the negative part of your article in my
opinion is that it does points this out less
than objectively, or maybe not as objectively
as it could.
Though it sort of rubs me the wrong way your
article has great positive value for getting me
thinking and trying to clarify for myself exactly
what I think here. I guess part of what I think
is that something that seems negative can be
a goldmine of information of we can objectively
look at it and dig into it.
AND ... WE CAN ... when it is not sticks and
stones and we do not lose out cool reacting
to words that do not hurt us.
Here is a deep dark secret--much of what we self-help authors write about, we have resolved on one level but are still working through on another much deeper level to learn the details well enough to talk about it intelligently and actually help others with sensible guidance.
I did a survey on what readers want from self-help authors: Here are the four corners of my audience (and so this kind of defines my "purpose" for me:
1. Some folks just want affirmation that they are okay and assurance that they are not too bad off.
2. Some want to be told how to live their life to be most successful with all the "how-to" details.
3. Some just want to be amused and entertained.
4. Others just want to be stimulated by a few creative ideas with enormous consequences, which they can own and develop further to grow and improve expoentially.
Quite a different audience to try and please!
Bill C.