I’m obsessed with this essay “Raising a person in a culture full of types” by Dan Brooks. Before we get to the author’s message, let’s take a moment to appreciate his sense of comedic timing, e.g.:

My son talks incessantly about VSCO girls and Karens and other categories of people he has learned about from YouTube. He described a classmate as “the kind of person who borrows your pencil and doesn’t give it back,” i.e. she borrowed his pencil and didn’t give it back. For a while he tried to propagate a type of his own invention, “the Suzan,” whose behavior was ill-defined but tracked closely with that of my mother of the same name. It did not catch on, and eventually he concluded that he was not the kind of person who could come up with memes.

Is it just me, or is this a highly clever paragraph?

Brooks’s point, expressed better there than I will here, is that our culture’s emphasis on “being“ over “doing” prevents us from separating people’s actions from their destiny. At best, the idea that people belong to fixed, inescapable categories is merely the antithesis of the growth mindset; it saps motivation from our desire to try new things (why learn programming if I am not a “math person”?). At worst, as Brooks points out, “The illusion of a fixed nature gives us an excuse to repeat bad behavior,” because every mistake is like a movie trailer for the rest of your life. And like a TV commercial, the fixed mindset is an illusion with a slope (sorry): it inclines us toward the most automatic decision instead of assessing the alternatives on their merits.

I will not pretend to be a paragon of the growth mindset. I talk myself out of good ideas, such as learning how to actually cook, all the time. But if I could choose to have one impact on the world, it would be to motivate those around me to reject limiting beliefs and embrace challenge—even at the risk of failure. And if linking you again to this essay, which has a wonderful subplot about fatherhood, is the way to do it, then, OK.