>>715539005This is where you're making a mistake in the dichotomy. Yes, they create self-imposed limits when confronted with failure. However, those limits should be broken by outside positive reinforcement. A baby doesn't have the capacity to experience a growth or fixed mindset, so the reason it learns to walk is because the parents support and foster their development to be able to do that. The human spine isn't naturally S-shaped; it forms that way after a human begins to move while upright. A human isn't immediately predisposed to upright walking even though it has significant advantages.
When a person hits a "wall" in real life, a person will have a growth mindset either because they have a predilection for narcissism and self-importance (which is a negative and feeds into delusions), or because they have a network that encourages them to push past the barrier. The reason the network encourages them to do so is because they care for the subject and want to see them improve. The network would also discourage them from continuing if harm would result from pursuing "growth". It's the difference between a guy and his friends working out together at the gym, and a guy and his friends shooting up steroids to get jacked.
The reason growth vs. fixed is a stupid concept is because it tries to isolate growth to the individual (nature) when it's about both the person trying to develop, and the environment they're in (nature and nurture). It would be like going to Haiti and telling an earthquake victim if they keep making mud cakes they'll eventually become a professional chef. Isolating the individual from environmental factors is a grift.