I'm noticing it more and more. Especially in my career..
I'm too gullible! I trust too easily, and believe what people tell me too fast.. and then it turns out they didn't tell me the whole story of flat out lied...


I have trouble forming (and then voicing) my own opinion around superiors and all of that is really starting to bug me.

It occured to me that this might stem from being raised in the church. (that and a very strict and controlling mother)

Question is, how do I overcome this? How do I become less gullible without becoming a sceptic bitch? I kind of like my positive attitude....

How do I become more aware in the moments when I need to be a little more on guard?

Does anyone have some advice? Can you point me in the direction of a good book that might help?

Have any of you struggled with this and overcome it?

Oh, yes,I struggled with it and used to hide it under the cover of "positive attitude," not realizing it should have been dragged out, and placed in the round file called "people pleaser."

I'd read so many self-help books; figuring it out was not in the books, it was in my acceptance that my happy attitude was all about "control" being paid foward; I expected all sorts of things in return.

Sometimes acceptance of self-truths, becoming self-aware, happens in a flash, but it takes real work to overcome lifetime habits.

If you're giving away your trust for free, why would anyone need to earn it? There's a difference between being friendly and open, or being gullible. It starts with being willing to protect those things that are precious to me - integrity, honesty, love, authenticity, laughter.

When I meet someone, I am (now) willing to alllow that person to show me who he or she authentically "is," and my "automatic grace" is in the absolute fact that so many have little to no idea "whom" they are. If I automatically "deem" them to be self-aware, and attach some sort of "good person" label, not only am I lying to myself, but it's my attempt to limit their behavior in my presense. In different ways, I communicate the expectations I attach to "good person."

Oh, huge red flag for me; how arrogant I was!

There was nothing "nice" about it!

The heavy, heavy price I paid was that I was usually the last one to "spot" a creep. I thought my so-called heart was on the side of "seeing only good" in people, but the raw truth was, in fact, it was really only looking out for itself. It was not full of generosity, but a heavy expectation.

If any of this strikes a chord with you, let me know, and we can talk about negotiation, with oneself, and with others.

Chord stricken. ;-)

Yes, on the people pleaser department but I have become very aware of that. And am working on reducing that. I agree that there is always some expectation inside of me. At the very least the expectation to be liked and treated likewise.

I don't only see good in people, but I do get caught out when it comes to honesty and getting caught in the moment of an event. Someone will come to me in a flurry and I will tend to take their word for it and react immediately.
While I would like to learn to stop, question .. and then respond..

I guess I'm looking for some kind of trigger to remind me..

I think we each could write the same book. ;)

Being aware in the moment - even though I feel I'm beyond automatic judgement of others, good or bad, one of the biggest people-pleaser tricks I needed to leave behind was my automatic agreement with the other party's position. That agreement was knee-jerk, I'm-on-your-side, you-have-a-confidant-in-me, blue-chip, ace-in-the-hole.

Ugh. Sometimes, it still sneaks up on me.

Most helpful is this *new rule* - active listening.

I don't have to agree or disagree if I am *only* listening, which (woohoo) contains the people-pleaser balm of repeating the words of the speaker back to him or her. After all, isn't that what people *really* want? To be heard and understood?

It's the difference between:

"Oh, that Tommy is such a rat for treating you that way!"

and

"So you feel that Tommy mistreated you when he [paraphrase the situation]."

This forces me to listen, ...really listen.

At work:

"Coworker X really shouldn't have done that to you."

or

"So you feel that Coworker X should not have [paraphrase]."


It's allowing the other person to retain ownership of the situation, supporting his or her need to be heard, and being the mirror that may help others fix their own problems.

When it's about facts or data, opinion does not enter into it, and you can freely state and support your evidence.

When it's about situations and feelings, those can be relevant to *only* the speaker, and only the speaker can own his or her own situations and feelings.

Feelings do not have "evidence." They just "are," and there are usually loads of faulty assumptions that created/support those feelings. That's just considering someone else's feelings. Now add yours to the mix, and see how wars begin. ;) You can't know their assumptions, or fix them. You *can* help them to become aware of them, without even trying very hard, or knowing the outcome.

If asked directly for *your opinion* on the Tommy or Coworker X situations, deflect to leave ownership with the speaker:

"So do you agree that Tommy was a rat?!"

"I sure can tell that you think so." or "Is it possible that Tommy was having a bad day?"

Follow-ups would be along the lines of, "So you want Tommy to..."

Just keep at it. You owe no one an auto-agree, just because you like them. Friends listen, and help speaker-friends to sort their own feelings.


I guess the baby step would be to begin every response with "So you feel that..." If you were listening, you'll be able to fill in the blank. If you weren't, apologize and ask the speaker to please repeat it.

Btw, one of the best negotiators I ever met, when I once demanded his assent to a customer "situation," responded,

"No, because I've been burned after hearing only one side."

And who hasn't?

We had known each other for nearly twenty years, and that simple denial still made perfect sense to me, and didn't hurt my feelings at all. I felt chagrin for even having asked it of him. He didn't say that I had burned him, only that he had been burned. Back when, I may have well burned him, myopic as I was. He managed to remain true to himself without condemning me. Mensch.


Tie a string on your finger. Active listening.

Being in the moment.. active listening..

yes. I know this.
Funny how you need reminding sometimes that those principles apply for yet another struggle we encounter.

You make great sense. Thank you for taking the time to share.

I don't associate skepticism with negative thinking. I do associate cynicism with negative thinking.

I associate skepticism with self care and an interest in knowing the truth. Also with curiosity.

Practice, practice, practice. Just begin questioning.

When presented with a "fact" just start asking yourself: "do I believe this? Why or why not? Then start asking the poser some probing questions like "where did you hear that?" or "can you explain what you mean?"

Good advice. THank you.

It's the practice bit that I find hard. I like quick fixes.. haha!

Is there any way to become more aware of it? I'd love for an alarm to go off in my head whenever I"m on the verge of getting swept away again..

I think awareness that you want to get better at skepticism is the first step.

After that, you'll realize you let a moment go way after the fact. Which is fine. It's not about getting into a battle with the other person in the minute, it's about changing the way your brain works.

Just so long as you start questioning, regardless of when it happens, is the important thing.

That said, I would say you can start by just challenging some of the sacred cow beliefs you already hold in your own mind. Just explore them a bit and you'll be analyzing before you know it.

Also, start to consider the possibility that being different is good. For me, naturally I just like swimming against the current. So that makes it kind of easy.

Good luck with your illumination.

This is a terrific thread. I recommend a YouTube channel called The Atheist Experience, which is a public access call-in show from Austin, TX. if you’re not an atheist or agnostic, it’s still a great show to watch to see how the hosts use logic and reasoning. Many of the hosts were raised in strict Christian religions Mormonism gets referenced quite a bit. Look for shows that Tracie Harris is part of, her critical thinking and reasoning has a softer edge than some of the others.

Thank you. I will check them out.

I'm not sure what to call myself in terms of atheist or not. Don't really feel the need either, but no I do not believe in god for what it's worth.

Becca Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thank you. I will check them out.
>
> I'm not sure what to call myself in terms of
> atheist or not. Don't really feel the need either,
> but no I do not believe in god for what it's
> worth.


Right now I call myself a "Not Really Anything."

Also, this thread seems to relate to female situations (correct me if I'm wrong). But as a guy I can really relate to it. While divorced several years ago I was drawn in by a user of the first order and I completely ignored all of the red flags flying in my face. I was a people pleaser el supremo.

Thanks for the post.

I'm not sure if it's a female subject Tom. But thank you.

I am inclined to think that for women growing up in the church the "We"ll think for you" thing was heavier, but I'm by no means sure.

Men obviously also got the messages of follow the prophen and doubt your doubts and don't listen to the anti's..

Part of the problem for me having grown up in a LDS environment was that as a woman was taught to be submissive to male priesthood authority.

That learned submissiveness spilled over into every other facet of my life. I've spent the better part of my adult years 'un'learning that submissiveness by becoming my own person. Learning assertiveness has helped.

In college we were offered an elective course called Assertiveness Training. And guess what? It was no surprise the only people who signed up for that were women.

Retaining femininity didn't go out the door when I began thinking for myself. I didn't lose anything by becoming more assertive. It has helped me to stand on my own and is empowering.

Accept that you're already using your critical thinking skills. The more you use them the easier it will get with time.

Communication skills are just as important, to implement what you're learning and where you're at IMO. And to let other people know what you're willing to accept and what you aren't.

Maintain boundaries. The adage "Fences make good neighbors," means exactly that. That principle applies in our personal relationships and work relationships.

Becca Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How do I become more aware in the moments when I
> need to be a little more on guard?

You might ask yourself, "Does this person want something from me?" Or, "Would this person have something to gain by not being truthful with me?"

Without getting too cynical, in a work situation, the answer is usually, "Yes." Everyone is trying to get ahead. A high percentage of people want to have someone else do their work, so they'll say whatever is necessary to pass it off.

So remember which coworkers have lied to you before and assume they will lie to you again. You might even explain to them, "You lied to me before about ________________, so I'm disinclined to believe you now."

I see some of it in your question. You ask how you can become less gullible without becoming a skeptical bitch.

What makes you think being a skeptic is bad? Can you be a skeptic without being a bitch?

Do you think your someone in power of you has made you feel like you can't question, and therefore, cannot be a skeptic?

It sounds like you have the ability to not be gullible (desire to not be taken advantage of is a strong start), but you have a personal hang up with questioning or being seen as a questioner. I think many of us raised in the church are that way. I am a skeptic and hate unmerited authority, yet I often go along in meetings or whatever--I know it's a product of my upbringing--and I hate it.

I'm not sure skeptic is the right word. (English is not my first language so I"m sorry if I can't find the right word)

Some people I know are always questioning everything. They will never react in a spontaneous manner, they will never jump up and say: "Oh how cool!!" and get excited over an idea. They will always question, come up with arguments about why not and problems that may arise.
They will always be weary, looking for alterior motives.


And that's not the sort of person I want to become. Does that make sense?

If you really want to change your thinking.

Do this:

Research Bayesian probability. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_probability

Then study logical fallacies until you recognize them when you hear them. (Look into the Trivium)

Research work by Robert Cialdini PHD to see how people are influenced.

Consider everything believe nothing.

Change your operating system. Think for yourself.

Thank you. I appreciate it. But to be honest, that is a little over my head. English is not my first language and that doesn't make enough sense to me to be able to dive in.

I see the situation as being the connection between how we act and how we think. The evidence we provide to others regarding our 'thinking' is by our actions, or inaction.

Our desire to gain a certain outcome can become a provocation to do something we regret so as not to lose 'favor.' Bluntly stated, you do something because you're afraid of what people will think if you don't. You care more about people's opinions than about keeping faith with yourself. It's practically epidemic in 1st world nations. Much less so in less developed countries.

The key to surmounting this is brutally difficult... You have to not care what people think of you.

Once accomplished, it makes it completely possible to practice the adage, "To thine own self be true."

Frankly, I don't expect people under 40 to be able to accomplish this.

Yes I think inherently that is a big part of it. Although I'm getting better at it.

Plus you only screw me over once nowadays. Once I've caught on to someone pulling one over on me, I will always be on guard around that person from then on.

Awesome thread.

The OP asked how can you make the trigger-flag appear faster.

My experience in making the kinds of changes talked about here (such as learning to active-listen instead of the auto-agree response---or the auto-argue response, for that matter) is that at first maybe you come up for air two days later and think, "Oh, I could have said this instead." Well, good---now you've recognized an alternative response that you like better---you can practice in retrospect. Over time, your awareness will increase, and the response you want to learn will come faster and more what you want more of the time.

Believe in process. That's how things really work.

That is exactly what is happening now. Hours later I get this lightbulb moment thinking: Wait a second... I should have/ could have.. .. next time I'm gonna..

I hope you're right and I will end up getting a faster response time.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/20/2017 01:01AM by Becca.