Discussion (Reminder/Revisited) Motivational lines are not helpful especially "You can do it!"

[TAW122]

I had similar topics with respect to motivational lines and similar platitudes, like this one here explaining why motivational crap is evil and another one explaining how uplifting, patronizing platitude pushers are not better than bullies. Recently, I just had an thought on the common line: "You can do it!" and "You can do anything you put your mind to." I find that line to be annoying and unhelpful and I will explain:

If one were to take that quote literally and to the extreme, then that would mean that anyone can do just about anything in the world. But factually speaking, that is simply NOT true. This is because everyone is born with different skills, backgrounds, and abilities. Some people are better than others at certain things. For example, I'm not really good at sports or anything that requires a lot of quick reflexes and quick reactions, I am simply not born that way, so like if someone were to say "TAW, you can do it!" I would just feel a bit annoyed, offended because I know it's not true. Likewise, someone who doesn't have mental acumen for mathematics and analytical thinking, it would be unfair to assume that said person could be a great mathematician, logician, or someone in the analytic field.

In addition to this, I'd like to say there are also limits as well. Some people are born with higher IQs, better genetics, better health, etc. thus have the capability to rise to the top of their field, and not everyone can or has the means to. Think of professionals sports for example. You could have someone who works very hard, has the genetics and ability, but still fall short. Also, not everyone is cut out to win the next Nobel prize, or be a personality. Sure, you can have someone who works hard and gets somewhere but again, not everyone can get there. Next example is colleges and universities. A lot of people who applied to very prestiguous universities around the world may/not necessarily gain admission to said universities or colleges. In fact, it's not just academic prowess, but a handful of other factors, some luck, and also competitiveness of the said university or colleges' program. Therefore, by throwing such a blanket statement around and then thinking that people can do it, sets them up for a lot of disappointment due to false hope and unrealistic expectations. This is the reality and those statements are out of line with reality. By their logic, if someone didn't reach a goal, then they didn't try hard enough, and it's their fault, which is far, far from the truth. The truth is that not everyone can be good at everything, some people are born with better abilities and higher IQ, some people are less fortunate, and of course, effort is a factor in the equation of success, but far from the ONLY factor.

To be fair, I get why motivational speakers and similar people want to encourage and rally others to do better and I can see that. I just don't agree with the premise and background of it, especially if it sets someone up for disappointment. Sure, there are people out there who could use the motivation, but people like me only find it as a nuisance more than anything.

Does anyone feel the same way too?

 

[TheSoulless]

I agree, though some live with the illusion that they can do anything and get motivation from that belief. I don't have much motivation for anything, but I prefer the harsh truth.

 

[HelloHell]

I had similar topics with respect to motivational lines and similar platitudes, like this one here explaining why motivational crap is evil and another one explaining how uplifting, patronizing platitude pushers are not better than bullies. Recently, I just had an thought on the common line: "You can do it!" and "You can do anything you put your mind to." I find that line to be annoying and unhelpful and I will explain:

If one were to take that quote literally and to the extreme, then that would mean that anyone can do just about anything in the world. But factually speaking, that is simply NOT true. This is because everyone is born with different skills, backgrounds, and abilities. Some people are better than others at certain things. For example, I'm not really good at sports or anything that requires a lot of quick reflexes and quick reactions, I am simply not born that way, so like if someone were to say "TAW, you can do it!" I would just feel a bit annoyed, offended because I know it's not true. Likewise, someone who doesn't have mental acumen for mathematics and analytical thinking, it would be unfair to assume that said person could be a great mathematician, logician, or someone in the analytic field.

In addition to this, I'd like to say there are also limits as well. Some people are born with higher IQs, better genetics, better health, etc. thus have the capability to rise to the top of their field, and not everyone can or has the means to. Think of professionals sports for example. You could have someone who works very hard, has the genetics and ability, but still fall short. Also, not everyone is cut out to win the next Nobel prize, or be a personality. Sure, you can have someone who works hard and gets somewhere but again, not everyone can get there. Next example is colleges and universities. A lot of people who applied to very prestiguous universities around the world may/not necessarily gain admission to said universities or colleges. In fact, it's not just academic prowess, but a handful of other factors, some luck, and also competitiveness of the said university or colleges' program. Therefore, by throwing such a blanket statement around and then thinking that people can do it, sets them up for a lot of disappointment due to false hope and unrealistic expectations. This is the reality and those statements are out of line with reality. By their logic, if someone didn't reach a goal, then they didn't try hard enough, and it's their fault, which is far, far from the truth. The truth is that not everyone can be good at everything, some people are born with better abilities and higher IQ, some people are less fortunate, and of course, effort is a factor in the equation of success, but far from the ONLY factor.

To be fair, I get why motivational speakers and similar people want to encourage and rally others to do better and I can see that. I just don't agree with the premise and background of it, especially if it sets someone up for disappointment. Sure, there are people out there who could use the motivation, but people like me only find it as a nuisance more than anything.

Does anyone feel the same way too?

I feel the same way. Very well said!

 

[death137]

Motivation quotes are crap. People should check uninspiration quotes they tell the real truth.

 

[GrumpyFrog]

I agree. "You can do anything!" can motivate some, but it also can make one feel inadequate and like they aren't trying hard enough when in reality the bar is simply too high for them to reach. I guess all of the empty-sounding platitudes exist because they are helpful for someone, but it's not a one-size-fits-all situation.

 

[262653]

I'd consider them helpful if the goal is to squeeze out of humanity as much as possible, just like survival instinct is pushing everyone to survive, regardless of individual capabilities for survival, or how they feel about it. I'm getting annoyed when people who got through tons of obstacles encouraging others to do the same, as if, if they did, then everyone else can. I guess the same can be said about those who didn't get through obstacles, and say to others that they won't succeed either, because "they've been there". It's not clear to me if motivational/discouraging quotes are more likely to improve the recipient's lives than produce the reverse effect.

 

[woxihuanni]

Further, in academia, meritocracy is not the only way it works, either. You can do really well, but be largely ignored if you come up with an innovation that is uncomfortably comprehensive for the community. That is, a lot of their analyses of phenomena would be obsolete if they acknowledged it (though their data would still be a contribution). Scientists are not pure angels who selflessly seek understanding, a lot of them are paper-churners.

This is not from some dreamer who dreamt up something that just didn't hold up in peer-review, but a scientist whose peer-reviewed and prestigiously published work is not even cited in some overview of the current theoretical landscape. They did not even cite and criticise, just ignored it altogether though they knew the work.

Oh, they cited my husband's smaller contribution. When I pointed out it was strange, he says: It is your fault if you kill yourself (after I've systematically tortured you), and so there is no more work you produce, which they may or may not cite in future. How is that relevant when at this point in time I DO have quite enough and they didn't cite it?

 

[XYZ]

Motivation quotes are crap. People should check uninspiration quotes they tell the real truth.

Love this!!! So true!!!

This is not from some dreamer who dreamt up something that just didn't hold up in peer-review, but a scientist whose peer-reviewed and prestigiously published work is not even cited in some overview of the current theoretical landscape

Oh, they cited my husband's smaller contribution.

Sartre was a genius, but so was his partner Simone de Beauvoire whose philosophical ideas are much more relevant today than his. Ask around, see how many know who Sartre is, and how many have heard the name Beauvoir.

I bet the majority will think Beauvoir is Marge Simpson's maiden name

It will take a hundred more generations until the stifling, male-soaked air from the musty chambers of academia gets cleared out and women are let in and recognized as equals. I feel rage when I hear that your research was ignored. The injustice of it all is sickening!

 

[Sprite_Geist]

The only time I would find the phrase: "You can do it!" helpful is if it was in response to me trying to hang myself.

Further, in academia, meritocracy is not the only way it works, either. You can do really well, but be largely ignored if you come up with an innovation that is uncomfortably comprehensive for the community. That is, a lot of their analyses of phenomena would be obsolete if they acknowledged it (though their data would still be a contribution). Scientists are not pure angels who selflessly seek understanding, a lot of them are paper-churners.

Agreed - this is a very good point. Science itself is a tool and it is neutral, but people forget that those that practice science are still humans with the same desires of greed and self-interest as anyone else. Businessman in lab coats.

 

[TAW122]

Motivation quotes are crap. People should check uninspiration quotes they tell the real truth.

The thing is, most people can't handle the truth. But on a more serious note, yes, some uninspiration quotes really show the true reality of the world but the truth shatters the NPCs' programming so they cannot bring themselves to face it let alone accept it.

I agree. "You can do anything!" can motivate some, but it also can make one feel inadequate and like they aren't trying hard enough when in reality the bar is simply too high for them to reach. I guess all of the empty-sounding platitudes exist because they are helpful for someone, but it's not a one-size-fits-all situation.

That's a valid point too. For those that have been helped by them, great for them, but it shouldn't be paraded as a "one-size-fits-all" solution and I agree with you.

I'd consider them helpful if the goal is to squeeze out of humanity as much as possible, just like survival instinct is pushing everyone to survive, regardless of individual capabilities for survival, or how they feel about it. I'm getting annoyed when people who got through tons of obstacles encouraging others to do the same, as if, if they did, then everyone else can. I guess the same can be said about those who didn't get through obstacles, and say to others that they won't succeed either, because "they've been there". It's not clear to me if motivational/discouraging quotes are more likely to improve the recipient's lives than produce the reverse effect.

To answer your question, I believe it is rather circumstantial dependent. For example, if you say to someone who has the capability, the skill, and resources to meet a goal (reasonably achievable and know that the person is able to), then encouraging them by saying "You can do it" can be helpful provided that they open to accepting said motivation. Now on the other hand, for someone who is clearly unable to and not willing to, it can only serve as annoyance for said person.

Further, in academia, meritocracy is not the only way it works, either. You can do really well, but be largely ignored if you come up with an innovation that is uncomfortably comprehensive for the community. That is, a lot of their analyses of phenomena would be obsolete if they acknowledged it (though their data would still be a contribution). Scientists are not pure angels who selflessly seek understanding, a lot of them are paper-churners.

This is not from some dreamer who dreamt up something that just didn't hold up in peer-review, but a scientist whose peer-reviewed and prestigiously published work is not even cited in some overview of the current theoretical landscape. They did not even cite and criticise, just ignored it altogether though they knew the work.

Oh, they cited my husband's smaller contribution. When I pointed out it was strange, he says: It is your fault if you kill yourself (after I've systematically tortured you), and so there is no more work you produce, which they may or may not cite in future. How is that relevant when at this point in time I DO have quite enough and they didn't cite it?

Well said, this is true and in a perfect world, yes people would be rewarded purely (or almost all) for their merits and researchers & scientists would pursue the truth rather than be "paper churners" for academia and prestige.