This is an interesting idea. The terms argument and criticism both have negative connotations in modern usage. Outside a philosophy classroom, most people will tell you that arguing is bad. And the term "constructive criticism" is not much better.

I tend to make up words on my blog. So, why don't we re-christen criticism as "help-talk" and "argument" can be "helpful discourse" or if discourse is too big of a word "growth conversations".

Any better ideas? Heck, I may blog about this next.

This is an excellent article. Many self-help books pretty much cover the same old stories. The 4 minute mile is popular. I find that they way they frame the story is important.

They argue that once the 4-minute mile was broken, it was quickly broken by others. Hence, the power of belief.

But I scoff at this rationale. For example, Mike Powell broke Bob Beamon's long jump record that stood for 23 years until Mike Powell broke it. But how come there aren't a flood of long jump record breakers?

Is it because no one believes the new record can be broken?

I think the 4-minute mile is just another form of inspiroof (proof by inspirational story).

I agree with Bob in the comments that belief does count for something. I mean if I don't think I can do something, I probably won't even attempt it.

But to say that I can do something because I believe is can is another matter. someone might believe they can fly if they drop enough acid, but that doesn't mean it's gonna happen. And I think that was the point of this post. Self-help books frame these stories as inspiroof of positive thinking. But in reality, good training is the more likely reason for the accomplishment.

But training hard doesn't really sounds so sexy as thinking positively, does it?

Carlon
http://dontstepinthepoop.com