Post: #1

I recently read a forum member saying that people don't change after age 30. He listed this as one of the truths he would tell his younger self in a thread covering that very subject.

Based on the studies I've read, people tend to grow more mellow and likable until the age of 40 or so and they also become less neurotic and more in tune with their inner self up until that age, after which there's somehow less progress to be made or some regression may be evident. On a more complex level, this could also tie into the life stage progression postulated by psychologists over 50 years ago, where each life stage in adulthood comes with specific crises or challenges to be solved and the succesful resolution of which leads to contentment and inability to resolve these questions succesfully leads to nagging issues.

More specifically I was waxing philosophically in my mind as to what truly constitutes change or does not; is change really simply the discovery of potential that was already there waiting to be tapped or the addition of something entirely novel into a person's character.

Let's say you have a mature adult who exhibits introversion, low self-esteem and shyness. When out in the night life, the guy always meekly coasts through the dance floor without making eye contact instead of stopping and dancing. Say he starts dancing as a hobby despite great initial resistance and reluctance and quite frankly does not enjoy it that much but wants to do something with his body other than just letting it grow older each passing year. Fast forward several years; he's clubbing again but this time gathers all his courage and goes dancing while seeking out IOI's as well as giving an appearance of skill and having a good time.
Yet when brought out of the dance floor and into a conflict situation or faced by some entirely different performance related challenge like singing karaoke, he would be insecure and reluctant just the same.

The construct is hypothetical and artificial but I don't think it's completely unrealistic. I also realize that there is bound to be SOME overlap there; when your confidence goes up a lot in one area, you're more willing to try out something else and accept your failures more confidently.

Would the person be changed in your view?

Post: #2

This thread might be better suited for the "Deep Forum."

But for what it's worth, here are my two-cents:

Remember: People typically seek pleasure and avoid pain. People can change, but since change is uncomfortable, a person must reach a point where it becomes more painful to remain in their current state than to adapt to a new mode. This is why it's difficult to prescribe the red pill to people who aren't ready for it. If things are more "comfortable" in their blue pill world, they won't want to change. But if that line of thinking results in bringing them enough pain, so much so they never want to feel that way again, they'll reach a point where they're finally willing to accept the red pill.

Truly, the fear of loss is a greater motivator for people than the potential for gain. You can explain 'til you're blue in the face why someone should adopt red pill philosophy, but it won't "click" for them until they realize there is more pain to be found in clinging to their old, pretty lies than in swallowing the bitter red pill of ugly truth.

Unfortunately, most people are simply too lazy or insufficiently self-aware to wake up and make the changes necessary for living a better life.

Post: #3

Similar to what Leone has said above, I think people can change, but that change is usually only precipitated by near traumatic events on a negative scale or something as equally dramatic on a positive scale. A person who lives live in stasis will not change.

Death in the family, divorce, childbirth, near death work experiences, paying off debts, have changed me, and the change has come in spikes after those events.

You can view it similarly to earthquakes. Dramatic change followed by long periods of building tension.

Post: #4

I think real change mainly involves two things:

1) Self-awareness. More specifically, the ability to identify and critically examine the underlying assumptions about oneself and/or the world that underpin a particular behaviour or attitude. The behaviour or attitude doesn't have to be conscious.

2) Discipline. The willingness to endure the uncomfortable conscious process of correcting those assumptions for as long as necessary for it to become internalized.

As an example, I've struggled mightily with alcohol abuse. I've been to treatment twice and attended AA on and off for several years. None of that addressed my underlying assumptions about alcohol and my own nature so I unsurprisingly continued to drink or was what they call a "dry drunk" during my intermittent stretches of sobriety. I won't bore you with details but it was only after I began to challenge and correct some of my deep-seated assumptions about alcohol and myself and exercise the discipline to not only not drink but to really meditate on this new understanding that I've managed to attain a changed state where I would say that aspect of my character has fundamentally shifted as far as that particular behaviour and attitude goes. Merely not drinking didn't constitute change at all.

Post: #5

ExZombie hits the nail on the head.

The problems with change are:

(02-05-2017 01:07 PM)ExZombie Wrote:  1) Self-awareness. More specifically, the ability to identify and critically examine the underlying assumptions about oneself and/or the world that underpin a particular behaviour or attitude. The behaviour or attitude doesn't have to be conscious.

It is incredibly difficult to be truly self aware in a non-biased way. People are not willing to be honest with themselves. Even if they think they are being "self-aware", they are actually just aware of the things they want to be aware of, and not aware of the actual truth in themselves. Accepting the truth about yourself takes a certain kind of mindset; it hurts to see and accept the fucked up shit about yourself and humans by default avoid pain. But to change the fucked up shit, you have to first see and accept it. Most people don't want to do that. Especially as you get older and have more responsibility (kids, aging parents, higher career positions, spouses) and less energy, you want to minimize pain because you are constantly under barrage from life.

And then, even if you manage to be self-aware, you still need

Quote:2) Discipline. The willingness to endure the uncomfortable conscious process of correcting those assumptions for as long as necessary for it to become internalized.

Humans are habitual. "To change" usually implies changing something that you do subconsciously, or in other words, replacing a "bad" habit with a "good" habit. The longer and more you do something, the better you become at it and the more it becomes ingrained in you. Thus, a 30 year old who wants to change will have a harder time than a 20 year old because the 30 year old has 10 more years of performing that habit. To overcome this, you need extremely high levels of discipline and will power. As I mentioned above, the older you get, the more responsibility and less energy you have, and thus are less willing to put in the time required to invest into changing a habit.

The older you become, the more time you will need to invest to overcome your ingrained tendencies. The older you become, the less willpower and though you have to give to changing your ingrained tendencies.

That said, if you really want to change, and you REALLY want to change, I believe anyone is capable of it. But you have to be willing to

1). accept the pain of being self-aware and being honest with yourself and
2). put in the time required to make it happen.