Hoopoe
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Would you agree with the following idea?
If you can reach a state of acceptance of your illness and the limitations, then you can better work within those limitations and achieve more than before because you're now able to set realistic goals, instead of setting goals that don't respect the reality of having a limiting chronic illness.
It sounds sensible doesn't it? Maybe not right for everyone and every situation but still sensible.
But there is a problem: it makes an assumption of how your mind works and proposes a specific causal relationship between acceptance and ability to do and achieve more.
In this idea, the mind is a force that makes positive change happen.
There are alternative explanations for an apparent relationship between acceptance of one's illness and a subsequent ability to do more. Maybe a person becomes more accepting because the situation they're in or the illness, have become less severe and therefore easier to accept. This improvement might also allow them to achieve more and better work around the limitations they still have. In this alternative interpretation, the conscious mind is just a commentator with little real influence. Maybe they're becoming interested in attempting to do more and solve their problems because they actually have some capacity to do that now, whereas before they did not.
And I think that this alternative explanation seems more correct. If the first was more correct, all these think-yourself-better approaches would consistently achieve great results.
These narratives of the mind making positive change happen seem to be everywhere in healthcare, with little or no evidence that they're actually correct, and at least so it seems, underwhelming results. The habit of creating explanations for why things happens, with little thought, is a bad one.
If you can reach a state of acceptance of your illness and the limitations, then you can better work within those limitations and achieve more than before because you're now able to set realistic goals, instead of setting goals that don't respect the reality of having a limiting chronic illness.
It sounds sensible doesn't it? Maybe not right for everyone and every situation but still sensible.
But there is a problem: it makes an assumption of how your mind works and proposes a specific causal relationship between acceptance and ability to do and achieve more.
In this idea, the mind is a force that makes positive change happen.
There are alternative explanations for an apparent relationship between acceptance of one's illness and a subsequent ability to do more. Maybe a person becomes more accepting because the situation they're in or the illness, have become less severe and therefore easier to accept. This improvement might also allow them to achieve more and better work around the limitations they still have. In this alternative interpretation, the conscious mind is just a commentator with little real influence. Maybe they're becoming interested in attempting to do more and solve their problems because they actually have some capacity to do that now, whereas before they did not.
And I think that this alternative explanation seems more correct. If the first was more correct, all these think-yourself-better approaches would consistently achieve great results.
These narratives of the mind making positive change happen seem to be everywhere in healthcare, with little or no evidence that they're actually correct, and at least so it seems, underwhelming results. The habit of creating explanations for why things happens, with little thought, is a bad one.
Last edited: