5 ms·

Note that I'm responding to a specific comment that implies being happy is extremely difficult. Those two things are in my book of "extremely difficult", and I'

Note that I'm responding to a specific comment that implies being happy is extremely difficult. Those two things are in my book of "extremely difficult", and I'm bringing them up as examples of the fact that goals are not choices. You can choose to train, but you can't choose to become an Olympian. But I can't figure out if you agree or disagree with happiness being extremely difficult to achieve. > It really is that simple, it requires commitment and self-policing to a great degree but in the end anyone can do it. I don't think I can make sense of this statement... if something has many requirements, and something to a great degree, how can you say that it is merely a choice, and that anyone can do it? Again, a choice is a decision, not a goal. There's no difference between "I'll try really hard to be happy" or "I'll try really hard to be an Olympian", they're both goals with no guarantees that you can fail at. What is great? The average person, by definition, is not great. So why are you saying anyone can do it, in the end, that anyone can be great? Simplicity is not relevant here. Winning a race is simple - just run faster than everyone else. This seems to be along the lines of losing weight. It's simple, but so many people fail at it. If people, in large numbers, greater than average, fail at doing something universality perceived as good, I posit that that means it's not available to most people for whatever reason, because nobody in their right mind would choose a bad outcome for themselves. If your interest is in making a large proportion of people happy, rather than making a few chosen individuals happy, it's a more interesting question as to why so many people "choose" to not be happy or some other universally positive thing. I'd say the word "choice" is being horribly misused. People struggle and fail, that's what's happening. What made you decide that changing how you think is simple, easy, and readily available?

FussyZeus 10y ago
> Note that I'm responding to a specific comment that implies being happy is extremely difficult. Those two things are in my book of "extremely difficult", and I'm bringing them up as examples of the fact that goals are not choices. You can choose to train, but you can't choose to become an Olympian. But I can't figure out if you agree or disagree with happiness being extremely difficult to achieve. I would say difficult, but not extremely difficult. Your examples require a lot of external resources and material goods to achieve, and the services of others. What we're talking about is possibly altering your food intake, maybe a supplement or two, and other than that it's just your own self discipline. > I don't think I can make sense of this statement... if something has many requirements, and something to a great degree, how can you say that it is merely a choice, and that anyone can do it? Because everyone has a brain and a will and those are in the vast majority of cases all you need to do it. > The average person, by definition, is not great. So why are you saying anyone can do it, in the end, that anyone can be great? Simplicity is not relevant here. Winning a race is simple - just run faster than everyone else. I would say the gateway to happiness is realizing that you are in fact not great, that you are not destined to be famous or wealthy, and to embrace just being the best you that you can be. Embrace average, buy better beer, enjoy the luxuries you can afford instead of pining for the ones you can't. > What made you decide that changing how you think is simple, easy, and readily available? Well again I said no such thing, I said in comparison to becoming an Olympian or being elected President that this was easy. There are a lot of other things that are easier than those two things. Altering the way you think just requires self discipline, self policing, and commitment. There's no magic solution or program or book, it's not self help tapes or a twelve step program. It's something you decide to do for you with the resources you were born with. I've made radical changes to how I think in the last few years and in so doing have greatly improved the quality of my life, and the first step on that journey was realizing that I was just a regular guy, I would never be a celebrity, never be very wealthy, never be famous and never be some massive achiever, and that there was nothing wrong with that. It hurts at first because our society tells us to a large degree that that is how you succeed in life, but after awhile, you learn to appreciate average. Since then I've never been happier.
- projektir 10y ago
  > Your examples require a lot of external resources and material goods to achieve, and the services of others. I find it interesting that you think this about becoming an Olympian, but not about being mentally stable and happy. Are you sure you are not simply labeling the thing you are unable to do as something requiring a lot of external resources, and then labeling the thing you are able to do as something not requiring such? Because I would certainly argue that becoming purposefully happy seems sufficiently out of reach for most people that it probably requires some external resources. Like a good social influence, for starters. Someone at least needs to be there to even tell you about such things. > What we're talking about is possibly altering your food intake, maybe a supplement or two, and other than that it's just your own self discipline. That's quite a caveat. Self-discipline is a fairly nebulous thing, how are you going to evaluate it? What is it chemically? Why do some seem to have less and some more? At what point would you stop saying: "Just get more self-discipline" towards a problem? Why is self-discipline not recommended for people with depression, anxiety, etc., if what you're saying is true? > Because everyone has a brain and a will and those are in the vast majority of cases all you need to do it. This looks like a claim, but I'm not sure what you're supporting it with. Some people have very poor brains, where does that fit in in your hypothesis? Should this have been prefixed with "healthy, standard brain"? Because that cuts out a pretty big chunk of people. > I've made radical changes to how I think in the last few years and in so doing have greatly improved the quality of my life, and the first step on that journey was realizing that I was just a regular guy, I would never be a celebrity, never be very wealthy, never be famous and never be some massive achiever, and that there was nothing wrong with that. I think the main problem with this thinking is that it's very unlikely that you're an average guy, and I'm curious as to when was the last time you've seen a truly average person. Or how about below average person. Chances are, that by all standard metrics - intelligence, social skills, income, health, etc., you're not average. You're not a celebrity, either, but I don't know why you're so concerned with the top 1% when there's 49% in between you could be in. The core question here is this: if it is all so available, and so straightforward, and open to everyone, and requires one to simply be human with a brain and nothing else, why is it, then, that nobody does it? Why do people choose to be unhappy, why do they choose to be fat?
  - 10y ago

FussyZeus 10y ago

> Note that I'm responding to a specific comment that implies being happy is extremely difficult. Those two things are in my book of "extremely difficult", and I'm bringing them up as examples of the fact that goals are not choices. You can choose to train, but you can't choose to become an Olympian. But I can't figure out if you agree or disagree with happiness being extremely difficult to achieve. I would say difficult, but not extremely difficult. Your examples require a lot of external resources and material goods to achieve, and the services of others. What we're talking about is possibly altering your food intake, maybe a supplement or two, and other than that it's just your own self discipline. > I don't think I can make sense of this statement... if something has many requirements, and something to a great degree, how can you say that it is merely a choice, and that anyone can do it? Because everyone has a brain and a will and those are in the vast majority of cases all you need to do it. > The average person, by definition, is not great. So why are you saying anyone can do it, in the end, that anyone can be great? Simplicity is not relevant here. Winning a race is simple - just run faster than everyone else. I would say the gateway to happiness is realizing that you are in fact not great, that you are not destined to be famous or wealthy, and to embrace just being the best you that you can be. Embrace average, buy better beer, enjoy the luxuries you can afford instead of pining for the ones you can't. > What made you decide that changing how you think is simple, easy, and readily available? Well again I said no such thing, I said in comparison to becoming an Olympian or being elected President that this was easy. There are a lot of other things that are easier than those two things. Altering the way you think just requires self discipline, self policing, and commitment. There's no magic solution or program or book, it's not self help tapes or a twelve step program. It's something you decide to do for you with the resources you were born with. I've made radical changes to how I think in the last few years and in so doing have greatly improved the quality of my life, and the first step on that journey was realizing that I was just a regular guy, I would never be a celebrity, never be very wealthy, never be famous and never be some massive achiever, and that there was nothing wrong with that. It hurts at first because our society tells us to a large degree that that is how you succeed in life, but after awhile, you learn to appreciate average. Since then I've never been happier.

projektir 10y ago
> Your examples require a lot of external resources and material goods to achieve, and the services of others. I find it interesting that you think this about becoming an Olympian, but not about being mentally stable and happy. Are you sure you are not simply labeling the thing you are unable to do as something requiring a lot of external resources, and then labeling the thing you are able to do as something not requiring such? Because I would certainly argue that becoming purposefully happy seems sufficiently out of reach for most people that it probably requires some external resources. Like a good social influence, for starters. Someone at least needs to be there to even tell you about such things. > What we're talking about is possibly altering your food intake, maybe a supplement or two, and other than that it's just your own self discipline. That's quite a caveat. Self-discipline is a fairly nebulous thing, how are you going to evaluate it? What is it chemically? Why do some seem to have less and some more? At what point would you stop saying: "Just get more self-discipline" towards a problem? Why is self-discipline not recommended for people with depression, anxiety, etc., if what you're saying is true? > Because everyone has a brain and a will and those are in the vast majority of cases all you need to do it. This looks like a claim, but I'm not sure what you're supporting it with. Some people have very poor brains, where does that fit in in your hypothesis? Should this have been prefixed with "healthy, standard brain"? Because that cuts out a pretty big chunk of people. > I've made radical changes to how I think in the last few years and in so doing have greatly improved the quality of my life, and the first step on that journey was realizing that I was just a regular guy, I would never be a celebrity, never be very wealthy, never be famous and never be some massive achiever, and that there was nothing wrong with that. I think the main problem with this thinking is that it's very unlikely that you're an average guy, and I'm curious as to when was the last time you've seen a truly average person. Or how about below average person. Chances are, that by all standard metrics - intelligence, social skills, income, health, etc., you're not average. You're not a celebrity, either, but I don't know why you're so concerned with the top 1% when there's 49% in between you could be in. The core question here is this: if it is all so available, and so straightforward, and open to everyone, and requires one to simply be human with a brain and nothing else, why is it, then, that nobody does it? Why do people choose to be unhappy, why do they choose to be fat?
- 10y ago