Our behaviour dictates our beliefs. But the dictates must mean to transcribe our actual beliefs, to lay out our beliefs, not control. We can determine our actual beliefs by watching our behaviour, which may be different that what we profess to believe. That realization was an eye opener for me, a teachable moment.
The book psychology says beliefs and thinking, feeling, and then behaviours, but that does not say anything about our automatic responses, that most of us live within. Our behaviour describes our automatic responses.
What am I on about? For years I have desired to eat only three moderate meal per day, but when I get hungry, it is difficult. Therefore, I must really believe, or at least have an automatic response .. that I should eat when hungry. Either concept might work for a person on a diet, but not both. I can have it one way or the other. Not both. That realization the behaviour describes beliefs, or behaviour describes my automatic responses... visceral animal responses not reasoned responses... along with the knowledge that beliefs drive behaviour, one can only conclude that I actually believe that I should eat when hungry and three meals each day, not just the three meals a day that I verbally ascribe too, with difficulty. A mental disconnect, cognitive dissonance, or what? A teachable moment?
Now how do I convince myself, only three moderate meals a day? First, they must be moderate, not skimpy. A skimpy meal may work, but several in a row is sure a setup for a slip... heavy meal... snack... something.
Teachable, uniform meals, must be part of the solution, I think. Back to counting calories for a bit, but also a minimum for each meal might help. But what do I know.