Verified by 
Some patients who come to psychotherapy see themselves as big failures in life because they believe that they have not accomplished much. When the therapist digs deeper into their "failures," it often turns out that they have not put much of an effort into succeeding at whatever it is they think they have not accomplished. When you ask why they did not go back to school to learn a new trade, look hard for the type of job they would like to have, audition for a play, go to places where they might meet a good mate, or whatever, they often say they did not do so because they were "afraid of failure."
That never made any sense to me. Does never having tried to accomplish something make you a success at it? Is that not itself a failure to accomplish it? Actually, the "fear of failure" folks often answer yes to that question, but protest that it is more painful to try and fail than never to have tried at all. Not better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all, I guess.
Of course, there is a presumption in the "I don't want to try because I might fail" protestation. These people are assuming that they will fail. Where is this presumed failure written in stone? Since they never even attempted to succeed, how do they know they won't surprise themselves? Since nobody ever gets a guarantee of success when attempting anything, we all are faced with this problem. And yet many of us persevere anyway. Why don't these folks?
It's also true that if you only make a half-hearted effort, you are far more likely to fail than if you give it your all. These people have never given it their all.
Ironically, if you are genuinely afraid of something, you will do your best to avoid it. If you fear failure, then you would want to do anything to avoid it. In which case you have to not only make the effort, but persist when things do not seem to be going your way. These people are almost going out of their way to be failures.
Sorry, but people who say these things are not afraid of failure. They are afraid of success.
A related issue comes up in the theories of Marsha Linehan, the current high guru in the community of therapists who treat Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), in her model known as "Dialectical Behavior Therapy" or DBT. She opines that patients with BPD patients show "apparent competence." What this means is that BPD patients often appear to have very good social skills, but they often do not seem to be able to use them in emotionally-charged situations.
It's a little unclear in her writings, but the use of the word "apparent" almost makes it sound like Dr. Linehan thinks that BPD patients do not really even have these social skills that they are nonetheless able somehow to effectively demonstrate when they are not in an emotionally-charged situation. Therefore, the skills must be taught to them in her social skills training groups. Patients in DBT have to attend these groups in addition to individual psychotherapy.
My question is this: How can you demonstrate a competency that you do not have through repeated performance? Oh, you might fool many people once or twice, but BPD patients can demonstrate social skills over and over again.
In fact, they are excellent judges of character, and can determine another person's vulnerabilities quicker than almost anyone else, in order to provoke from another person any reaction they want. They are well known to be master manipulators. How can they do that if they lack social skills?
I think it more likely that they have the competencies in question, but are choosing not to use them in certain situations. It is far simpler to fake incompetency than competency.
Some readers may have seen the movie "The Killing Fields" about the genocide in Cambodia. The Khmer Rouge killed anyone with an education. In the true story portrayed in the movie, a physician survives by pretending to be an illiterate peasant. In this case, acting as if he were incompetent was the most competent thing he could have done.
So the people who do not use the skills they possess are very similar to the people who protest that they are failures before they have made any effort in reaching their goals. They are afraid to use their skills in certain situations - often but not always the stressful ones - because they might succeed at something.
What could that something be? What would happen if the people described in this post succeeded?
When therapists who understand this use certain techniques to pursue the answer to this question, they usually find that the patient succeeding at whatever would provoke a lot of negativity, sometimes as serious as life and death, within their families of origin. Their parents and other family members might react with severe invalidation of the patient, as well as beginning or escalating any of the following: their own self-destructive behavior, interfamilial conflict, domestic abuse, suicidal impulses, alcohol or drug abuse, or even murderous impulses.
No wonder these patients choose to fail. By doing so they are in fact succeeding - at preventing these outcomes.
