It pays to switch outlooks depending on your goals: mindset modality
First things first, what’s a mindset? Googling “define mindset” gives us: “the established set of attitudes held by someone,” (emphasis added) more on this later. What a mindset is not: a mood. A mindset’s effect on you is similar to a mood’s effect — but the former is derived by what you choose to focus on, while the latter forms from one’s emotions (or external forces and circumstances) and represents something closer to an “end state.”
Many mindsets have merit, yet some of us (including myself until recently) settle into the one that is best aligned with our worldview and then proceed to operate in adherence to it day-by-day. In this mode, even if we’re openminded and change our worldview as needed, our mindset is only tweaked as a result. This approach to *picking* one’s mindset is common because it’s effortless (perhaps unknowingly done) and affords stability. But it oftentimes leads one into a local maximum state, not optimal for particular goals. (In my case, I defaulted to a cynical mindset.) [In this post “cynicism” is defined as a concerted effort to understand the world as it could be explained by others’ motivations, a truth-seeking process.]
As a maker I’ve found it pays to embrace optimism, not cynicism. Being an optimist allows you to practice cognitive dissonance about the things that are out of your control while focusing on positive outcomes. For, those who spend their time thinking about end-states, can traverse backwards from those eventualities and potentially discover paths to success (the basic premise behind self-fulfilling prophecies). A bit of delusion is not a bad thing if you’re developing a project, because it allows for greater enthusiasm and, consequently, greater output. An optimist shouldn’t be ignorant of facts or information but should simply not dwell on the most-likely outcomes of stretch-goals. [As an aside, I’m a podcast junkie and have heard several successful entrepreneurs testify that their optimism (and possibly naiveté) in the early days was indispensable, most recently Daniel Ek of Spotify and, most memorably, Chris Sacca in describing desirable traits of founders (an epic podcast, btw).]
Scientists have famously practiced cognitive dissonance, focusing on the positive ramifications of their work — or at least detaching themselves from potential negative consequences (rife during the Manhattan Project). E.g., I have a friend who’s passionately obsessed with artificial intelligence, and he loves to talk about the future as he imagines it: all the mind-bending ways AI will enhance our life in the next 10 to 30 years. I agree with his assessments: they’re exciting and understandably fuel his passion. But he does not talk about the potential negative outcomes (the impossibility of regulating AI, botnets deliberately paired with AI [trained in systems-penetration], etc) unless I force the conversation in that direction. That’s cognitive dissonance, and he does great work in that field because he’s optimistic. When my concerns are artificially limited, I’m more prolific in my work and happiness.
Optimism is not compatible with cynicism and must be *chosen* at its behest if the benefits from it are to be fully realized.
“Doesn’t being an optimist lead to shortsightedness?” you may ask. It would, if it became an established mindset, but it doesn’t. If it’s derived from your goal (as opposed to derived from a worldview) then it can be swapped with an another when that time comes. (I do not recommend a optimistic mindset for many goals, especially lawmaking!) Case in point: journalism benefits from a healthy dose of cynicism, because understanding the world through others’ motivations is an important aspect of the trade. I take on that role a few days a week, and this mindset is a natural fit. Furthermore, a certain level of cynicism is vital to forming one’s worldview and shouldn’t be ignored. Cynicism can become an all-consuming mindset when it is affixed to one’s worldview. If I wanted to be an activist, a noble pursuit to be sure, I’d choose to be a cynic on behalf of that goal, not because of a worldview. The full-time cynic is led down a path of endless rumination and gets worked up over perceived injustices. Don’t get me wrong, we all get worked up over things for good reasons, but we can vent and move on if we’re not in a position to make a greater impact. (How many of us have relatives that forward chain-emails about our impending doom?)
The point is: one can be flexible with their mindsets if they detach them from their worldview/outlook. And the effect can be liberating.
I’ll end by exploring another mindset I call “ambitionless,” more or less self-explanatory it’s great for weekends! Ambitionless is designed to take me completely out the bubble of which I’m daily ensconced and drop me “in the moment” (reminiscent of a certain Eastern philosophy). This gives me space to get the most out of my time with friends… or even write. (Here I am, doing the thing I couldn’t justify in other mindsets.) Ambition uses the same fuel that’s required to explore interesting tangents and develop empathy. Projects can consume all of that fuel if you let them, so “ambitionless” is my way of not letting that happen.
Needless to say, I’m a bit of an introvert and have a single-track mind: when I lock on to a target, I pursue it wholeheartedly. So I think this essay applies best to people with that same characteristic.
