All intellectual paradigm shifts pass through a period of uncertainty and confusion, until new information perhaps a reorganization on what is hoped to be a higher, more comprehensive level.
And I would submit there is an emotional analogue. Emotions have a logic and form, and habitual pathways, which, too, are amenable to reorganization, provided one is sufficiently receptive to what amounts to a logic of self organization without intellectual input.
Put another, simpler way: you cannot grow without confusion. I don’t think it is possible. If you cannot tolerate confusion, you have permanently limited yourself. This inability is both a source of, and a sign of, constraint and smallness.
And I would submit that, paradigmatically, this inability underlies most of the present failures of Western science. It underlies Stephen Pinker’s rejection of Attachment Theory. It underlay Stephen Hawkings atheism. It underlies the failure of people like Richard Wiseman to admit that a superabundance of evidence in support of psi is actually meaningful and should lead to their acceptance that there is in fact an unknown force at work which warrants serious scientific attention by the mainstream.
Put yet another way, if you have to be who you have always been, you will get your way. No one is stopping you from being small. Indeed, no one can.