The Power of Positive Thinking was first published in 1952, and spent 186 consecutive weeks on the New York Times bestseller list. It has sold, according to some estimates, over 5 million copies, and has spawned a horde of copies, including books like The Secret and Your Best Life Now. More than that, though, it has created a place for itself (and its thesis) in the common consciousness, long after its author’s name (Norman Vincent Peale) has begun to fade from memory. This morning, though, I heard Peale’s name referenced in a most unusual place: On The Blitz, a segment of ESPN’s flagship program, SportsCenter. Hosted by analysts Chris Berman (a long-time sportswriter and TV personality) and Tom Jackson (a former NFL player), The Blitz offers highlights and analysis of each Sunday’s NFL contests. As you might imagine, for several weeks, the show has been headlined by the mind-blowing exploits of Tim Tebow and his Denver Broncos.
In his postcame comments (after improbably leading the Broncos to 10 points in the final two minutes of regulation and a field goal in overtime to beat the vaunted defense of the Chicago Bears), Tebow credited the “belief” that his team had in itself. Each player was said to “believe” in all the other players and to “trust” that they were never out of it, even as victory seemed more and more remote. Berman, reacting to Tebow’s and his teammates’ comments, said something like, “It reminds you of Dr. Norman Vincent Peale…it’s still true.”
Is it? Is there power in positive thinking? I’ve argued elsewhere that there isn’t, or at least not substantive power. I thought for a second, watching Berman’s broadcast, that maybe it’s true in team sports in a way that it isn’t for an individual. Confidence before a game can sometimes lead to a victory, right? But isn’t it true that, as the sample size approaches infinity, talent will win out? Tim Tebow’s fourth quarter heroics could be attributable to his option- and power-rushing style wearing down his opponents, rendering them impotent to stop him late in games. As Tebow himself is quick to point out, Denver’s defense has been playing wonderfully, allowing just 102 points in their last six games (all wins…that’s 17 points per contest, and 56 of those points came in TWO of those games, against the Raiders and Vikings), allowing Tebow and the offense to remain close as the games near their end.
The idea that confidence can lead to (or even equal) success is a powerful one, and one with significant cultural cache. This is because it allows us to feel responsible…or, better, powerful…and secure. We often blame others when we fail, but we want the credit when we win. Even more prevalent is the fear of powerlessness. If the Broncos won or lost based on factors beyond their control…that’s a terrifying situation. Though we would prefer to be able to blame outside forces for our failures, it’s a trade we’re willing to make to not only be able to take credit for our successes and to shield ourselves from the effect of factors beyond us.
I’d be more likely to believe Tebow if he said that God was causing the Broncos to win that I am to believe his claim that the victories come because his teammates “believe” in one another. But I have the easiest time believing that the Broncos win because, when it comes to crunch time, they are better prepared, more efficient football players than their opponents. I can only live in my own skin, and my own experiences are the only ones I can see from the inside (note well: this kind of anecdotal evidence is what drives me so crazy when people try to substantiate claims of the power of positive thinking), and I have found that positive thinking is not only lacking in efficacy, it lacks existence itself. I can’t choose to think positively; that’s pretending. When Jim Carrey asks his son to revoke his birthday wish in Liar Liar, he finds that the magic didn’t work. He asks his son what happened, and the kid says, “Yesterday, when I wished that you couldn’t lie, I really meant it. Today, when I took it back, I only did it because you told me to.” Carrey responds: “Let’s do this again, and this time…MEAN IT.”
We can see how patently ridiculous this is. You can’t mean something you don’t mean. You can’t be positive about something that you’re not positive about. Soon enough, the Broncos will lose a football game, and it won’t mean that they’ve stopped believing in each other, and it won’t prove that Norman Vincent Peale was wrong, any more than their winning streak proves that he was right.
COMMENTS
9 responses to “Was Norman Vincent Peale Right? The Continuing Saga of Tim Tebow”
Leave a Reply
I’m curious to see how other respond to this – I think you’re right in the main, but when athletes have belief and trust in their teammates, that tends to produce pretty good results. I think that may be a bit of what Tebow means – he trusts that his offensive line will do X, or that the defense will do Y, which allows him (or any other player) to focus on executing his assignment. When that happens, it can be a contributing factor in the team’s success. However, to the extent that he – a professing Christian – is spouting “positive thinking” nonsense, it’s clearly indicative that Tebow is not speaking in clear, distinct terms.
Matthew – That’s an interesting thing you bring up. As an athlete myself, I totally get what you’re saying about having trust in teammates doing their jobs enabling you to focus on (and better do) yours. If that’s what Tebow meant, I’m on board. It’s certainly not what Berman was talking about, and I didn’t really get the feeling that that was what Tebow was talking about, either. In both cases, it seemed to be a more disembodied “belief” that they would win, not that they could properly execute the skinny post. After all, Tebow DID oxymoronically say that “if you believe, sometimes unbelievable things are possible.”
Nick – Great piece. I saw the same ESPN clip and had the same thoughts as you – mainly lamenting the fact that NVP continues to hold such huge sway in the contemporary dialogue concerning Christianity.
That being said, there was something that Tom Jackson said in that ESPN piece that got me thinking, something I think is true and genuinely connects to Tebow’s Christian faith, apart from all the positive thinking crap. Jackson said that, whereas other quarterbacks might get down on themselves when they’re 58 minutes into a game and have only completed 3 of 18 passes (i.e. they’re failing miserably), as Tebow has done often this season, Tebow doesn’t seem to ever lose his confidence/hope, and I would say that this kind of confidence/hope comes from outside of himself, i.e. knowing, on some level, that it’s just a football game, that it doesn’t really matter, that even if everything falls apart, God loves him and that he’d probably rather be building hospitals in the Philippines anyway. I think that it might be Tebow’s faith in God that allows him remain hopeful & confident, even when there is no evidence that he should be. This is also why he seems able to be so honest/transparent all the time, and why he constantly gives the credit to everyone but himself: he has, seemingly, no need to justify himself. Of course, I’m sure he has his problems, but I must say that I envy this kind of hopeful/confident/honest/transparent/self-effacing faith.
Awesome addendum. Love this – thank you.
Nick, how long has it been since you’ve played, rather than just watched, sports. 🙂 If it was only a matter of talent, then you could reliably pick the winners of most every game in just about any sport. (And most of us wouldn’t bother watching.) But winning isn’t just a matter of sheer talent, physical prowess, or training. While all those things matter, they are held together by the fragile yet powerful human psyche. As any athlete (or musician or politician or teacher or preacher…) can tell you, believing in yourself and those around you makes a huge difference. If you’re worried that Tebow’s or Berman’s statements provide a reliable endorsement of Norman Vincent Peale’s skewed sense of the Gospel, relax – these guys aren’t doing theology, they’re simply observing that on any given day confidence in yourself and your team makes a huge difference – it doesn’t save you, but it sure makes you play better.
Ouch, David! I play regularly…promise! And I think it’s important to note that I’m talking about long-term values here. I did say “as sample size approaches infinity” after all. I think you’re right about individual games; that’s why so many people love the NCAA tournament: anyone can win. But over the course of something like an NBA season, with best-of-7 playoff series, prognosticators get MUCH better at predicting champions. The Timberwolves might ride a wave of confidence and “belief” to a victory over the Heat in January, but they won’t be around come playoff time, no matter how deep their faith in each other. Confidence can give you a push over the top (a shooter is much more likely to make a shot he expects to make) but it’s not enough over the long haul. It’s invoked, in a case like Tebow’s, to try to explain “inscrutable” success. Tebow can’t possibly be good enough to win games, so he must have a deeper belief in his teammates than his opponents do. Bull-roar, says I.
The placebo effect is real – and not just in medicine. That’s one reason double blind experiments are necessary for getting at what’s “really” going on. Now, as Nick points out, as the sample size gets large, the placebo effect (usually) becomes unimportant. But, hey, we don’t live our lives as mere “individual members of large statistical populations.” Whether I’m playing sports or battling cancer, I want to believe that (a) it is possible to beat the odds (statistically speaking there are “tails” or extremes in every probability distribution), and (b) I CAN be one of the ones that beats the odds, and (c) the factors that determine whether I beat the odds are NOT entirely random – in fact, in some specific situations that I find myself, I can actually influence the odds by what I do….believe….and pray. Not always. Not even usually. That’s why it’s called “beating the odds.” As much as I love Mockingbird, sometimes it seems that we’re trading the false mantra of “I am the captain of my own fate!” for an equally false “Positive thinking can’t influence anything.” Remember: the placebo effect is real.
Skip – I was actually thinking about the placebo effect today…Colin Cowherd was talking about it in relation to Tebow. But I think there’s a real difference between “positive thinking” and the placebo effect. Key to the placebo effect is that fact that patients actually think they’ve been given the drug being tested. They are told that they’ve been given it. They’re not deciding to believe that something that shouldn’t help them (a water pill) actually will. It’s fine and dandy, and even helpful, to have what Bill Simmons calls “irrational confidence.” He uses it for basketball players who always think they’ll make shots, no matter the situation or location. But you can’t TELL someone to have such confidence. That’s the problem with espousing “positive thinking.” It doesn’t work (or exist) when you have to generate it yourself.
Nick, I agree, you can’t be positive about something that you’re not positive about. And someone telling you you SHOULD be, isn’t going to help. But what are the sources of “irrational confidence”? I suppose they vary from person to person. Is it possible that something very similar to “irrational confidence,” and “positive thinking” is hope? “Irrational” hope can make the difference in a ballgame – and a lot of other areas of life. Hope that Mohammed will save me from my sins may not turn out very well for me. Hope that somehow, we don’t know how, but somehow, we’re going to fight back from a big deficit in the fourth quarter against a more talented team may at least make it possible to come back. Conversely, if I say to myself, “We’re toast. We’re never going to be able to come back from this deficit,” then I’ve pretty much ensured that I’m not going to contribute much to a comeback.