Self-critical/self-aware...

[VBM]

Hi,

I've never received education in psychology so if what I'm describing is rudimentary or crude or plain wrong, I apologize. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I've noticed that I have a hard time recognizing my character flaws on my own; and even after they're pointed out to me, I have a hard time correcting what is my auto-pilot-flawed-behavior (for me, i'm oftentimes rash/impatient and not nearly meticulous enough)

Do we unconsciously "not see" ourselves objectively, so to have better opinion of ourselves than we otherwise might? Similar to the phenomenon of hearing (disliking) your own voice on tape or not liking pictures of yourself...

And, if this is an inherently human trait, to overlook over our own small imperfections; how then, do we recognize and correct our flaws to improve in the things we do, short of continuous self-analysis?

In a poker sense, for strategic and tactical weaknesses, of course can can get a coach or have a peer give us feedback.

But what things can we do to "adjust" to compensate for our inherent character weaknesses? e.g. if we're particularly prone to steaming, do we try to overcompensate by intentionally trying to be dispassionate? can this approach actually hurt more than help, by making us act/behave uncomfortably and awkwardly?

curious what others have to say...

[Mayhap]

We don't consiously draw our own breaths. When you tune in to that force which does the breathing in you (Life, God, Spirit ...) and realize that it is part of something much larger than you (and therefore you are not really who/what you think you are) it expands your awareness so that it is easier to see and respond to your personal faults.
My $0.02
/M

[Mike]

What you are describing is a lifetime of learned behavior. You have a tool chest of things you do that work for you, just like mine work for me. It's not so much we do not want to see our flaws as we do not see we have any to start with. After all, the way we interact has been working just fine for us since we were baby's.

For example, I am a steam roller or bulldozer, and I also have a rather high iq which is a bad combination. So what I do is when I speak is I do not leave room for others to add their points of view, such as this post for example.

I am right and that's all there is too it. I may well be wrong but that's how I work because it has always worked for me.

When I catch myself doing this in conversation and someone points it out to me, I try to say (when I remember), "thank you". It is like a reset for me. I then try to change my talk to a style that is not so overbearing.

It is a little trick, but it helps. What makes it hard is I have to want to change and sometimes I wonder why should I? After all it has worked for me all these years....

Perhaps others have some tricks they use to change their patterning behaviors?

[Pepsquad]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi,

I've never received education in psychology so if what I'm describing is rudimentary or crude or plain wrong, I apologize. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I've noticed that I have a hard time recognizing my character flaws on my own; and even after they're pointed out to me, I have a hard time correcting what is my auto-pilot-flawed-behavior (for me, i'm oftentimes rash/impatient and not nearly meticulous enough)

Do we unconsciously "not see" ourselves objectively, so to have better opinion of ourselves than we otherwise might? Similar to the phenomenon of hearing (disliking) your own voice on tape or not liking pictures of yourself...

And, if this is an inherently human trait, to overlook over our own small imperfections; how then, do we recognize and correct our flaws to improve in the things we do, short of continuous self-analysis?

In a poker sense, for strategic and tactical weaknesses, of course can can get a coach or have a peer give us feedback.

But what things can we do to "adjust" to compensate for our inherent character weaknesses? e.g. if we're particularly prone to steaming, do we try to overcompensate by intentionally trying to be dispassionate? can this approach actually hurt more than help, by making us act/behave uncomfortably and awkwardly?

curious what others have to say...

[/ QUOTE ]

Good question. IMO, this is what makes 2+2 such a powerful forum to help us learn and grow as players. Left to our own vices, human beings have the ability to convince themselves that almost anything is true. However, these forums provide an atmosphere akin to the "positive peer culture" model. For example, I might be thoroughly convinced that A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif is a playable hand in a given situation and be very unmotivated to credit any advice which contradicts this belief. However, when TEN different people (whose opinions you respect) all tell you that you are wrong, it becomes much more difficult to hold onto those false beliefs. You are forced to ask yourself "What is more likely? That I am wrong or the concensus of ten very good poker players is wrong?

I believe the best way to analyze and work on our weaknesses (be it at poker, tennis, love or needlepoint) is to seek out people whose opinions we respect and ask them...AND be willing to accept the feedback.

Pep.