experience in factory accident cases, when he has only done one in his life; and the barrister tries not to let his clerk (or himself) down too badly. Much of the time our actions are a mixture of confidence and lack of confidence at the same time.
This idea is most important: namely that for most of us, actions mean the expression of confidence and lack of confidence at the same time. One might have expected it to be otherwise. One might have expected that some of our actions would be confident, as when we were dealing with matters we knew about, and other actions of ours would be lacking in confidence. But in my opinion this is too superficial a view. Possibly this simple analysis would be correct if one were describing a single-minded man, dedicated to some purpose. But most of us are not single-minded, and are not dedicated; and our actions must, I think, be described as the putting into practice of confidence and lack of confidence at the same time.
If this is true, certain consequences would seem to follow. Normal experience teaches us that the things we do really well or confidently, we get better at, whether in the realm of law, or athletics, or what you will. Confidence generates confidence. So one would expect to find that insofar as our actions are expressions of our confidence, we become more confident the more we repeat the actions. But insofar as our actions are expressions of our lack of confidence, the opposite happens. Either one admits one's inadequacy or one doesn't. No doubt if it were possible to admit it, in the end experience would enable it to be overcome. But so often it is not possible to admit it; one hardly dare admit it to oneself, certainly not to other people. One has to put a bold face on things, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say a brazen face. And so as likely as not the process described in Chapter 4 is set afoot, that of pretending one has confidence when in fact one has not; the deceiving first of…