4 ms·

> If you think something is important but people older than you hold don't hold it in high regard, there's a decent chance that you're right and they're wrong.

by gfodor 8y ago

> If you think something is important but people older than you hold don't hold it in high regard, there's a decent chance that you're right and they're wrong. Status lags by a generation or more. I winced a little bit at this one, though it's worded strangely so I may be misinterpreting it. The way I took it is poor advice -- when there is a mismatch between yourself and another in terms of "what's important" or what should be kept in "high regard", do not immediately assume the other person is a moral failure. This is the kind of thinking that leads to division and mistrust between people. The proper way to react to this is to make a good faith effort to understand why the person doesn't care about the issue you do, and be conscious that you may also change your mind one day. "Strong opinions, weakly held."

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
dkrich 8y ago
Agreed. The older I get the more I’ve learned to listen to other people and to question my own ideas. I’ve gotten to the point where I actually view people who listen to others and are open to changing their opinions when confronted with good advice as being much more intelligent than those who are sure they are right about everything all the time. As the Bob Dylan song goes, “I was so much older then, I’m younger than that now.”
- mcguire 8y ago
  Are you the co-founder and CEO of Stripe? Were you a millionaire at 19 and now, at 29, worth north of a billion dollars? Why would anyone want to listen to your advice? (/s Be careful about listening to people who are obviously statistical outliers, who are young and apparently have succeeded at everything they've touched.)
  - eldavido 8y ago
    I find it interesting that it's accepted in our culture, that "Having money" means "Someone worth listening to". I see this all the time and just wanted to point it out.
  - dkrich 8y ago
    Because advice comes in many forms and is almost never universally applicable. Something that sounds great when applied to one case can usually be flipped on its head with a thousand counterexamples. I'd rather listen to someone who was an expert in whatever problem domain I was seeking advice in than someone who demonstrated massive success in a completely different area, yet I see people do this all the time. Mark Cuban is regularly on CNBC discussing his stock picks while he has actually underperformed the markets for many years. Yet his opinions and advice on stock-picking are highly respected because he top-ticked the sale of a startup that no longer exists and hasn't really created anything lasting since. The Stripe founders I'm sure have incredible expertise in the payment and startup space and are clearly brilliant. Yet from reading this piece I can sense in a way that he himself probably can't, a sort of ignorance that comes from a lack of life experience. I wouldn't really be too interested in their ideas on most other subjects whereas I would be very interested in reading someone who (gasp!) hadn't created a 10-figure net worth before 30 if they had experience in that area. What a concept. I can't recall how many times I've looked back on a time I dismissed someone else's opinion only later to realize I was completely wrong. The realization that your opinions very often will prove incorrect and the associated behavioral change is what makes you wise, not the refusal to admit you are wrong and the dismissal of everyone who disagrees with you.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- drjesusphd 8y ago
  > I’ve gotten to the point where I actually view people who listen to others and are open to changing their opinions when confronted with good advice as being much more intelligent than those who are sure they are right about everything all the time. I also find this to be a useful heuristic. Particularly "How seriously does this person take my ideas? When I'm wrong, do they make an effort to explain why? Are the open to me being right?" This works best when you're a student or otherwise new to something Obviously, it won't work when you have status over the person; they'll listen to you anyway.
imgabe 8y ago
You can disagree with someone about whether a piece of technology is important or not without regarding them a moral failure.
- gfodor 8y ago
  Where did the OP limit his claim to be about a specific thing like technology? And why did you interpret my comment as having universal applicability? There are categories of things which if you firmly believe that you are right and the other person is wrong in ascribing importance to them (following the OP's heuristic) you'd necessarily assume that person is a moral failure. For example, if I highly regard the ideas of a specific political philosophy, and others dismiss them as bad ideas that have been disregarded, it seems like a bad idea for me to conclude I'm correct in respecting them simply because people in my age group similarly hold those ideals in high regard. My point was that a heuristic that urges one to have confidence that they have "correct" value judgements simply due to their age is a bad rule to have in your mental model of how to navigate differences with others, even if it's not a hard one.
  - imgabe 8y ago
    Context. Patrick Collison is famous around here for building a SaaS business and writing a lot about helping others to do so. This is Hacker News which focuses heavily on business and tech. > My point was that a heuristic that urges one to have confidence that they have "correct" value judgements simply due to their age is a bad rule to have in your mental model of how to navigate differences with others, even if it's not a hard one. The entire world nudges young people in the opposite direction from the very moment they're born. That nudging is frequently incorrect when it comes to technology, so some nudging in the direction of young people believing in themselves is appropriate. In 2006, there were a bunch of college students who thought Facebook was a pretty big deal. Most 50 year olds in 2006 probably would have disagreed and didn't see why it would be important to post pictures of your friends drinking online. The older people were wrong. It's not a value judgement. They weren't bad people because they were wrong about a technology trend. But they were still wrong. When any new thing comes along there's always a few older, well respected people who dismiss it and say it isn't important. They end up being wrong. It you want to be the one bringing those new things about, you need to learn to ignore those people, even though they're older than you.
tim333 8y ago
I imagine he's thinking of thing like doing a start up or getting into blockchain rather than say moral values.

by gfodor 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

dkrich 8y ago

Agreed. The older I get the more I’ve learned to listen to other people and to question my own ideas. I’ve gotten to the point where I actually view people who listen to others and are open to changing their opinions when confronted with good advice as being much more intelligent than those who are sure they are right about everything all the time. As the Bob Dylan song goes, “I was so much older then, I’m younger than that now.”

mcguire 8y ago
Are you the co-founder and CEO of Stripe? Were you a millionaire at 19 and now, at 29, worth north of a billion dollars? Why would anyone want to listen to your advice? (/s Be careful about listening to people who are obviously statistical outliers, who are young and apparently have succeeded at everything they've touched.)
- eldavido 8y ago
  I find it interesting that it's accepted in our culture, that "Having money" means "Someone worth listening to". I see this all the time and just wanted to point it out.
- dkrich 8y ago
  Because advice comes in many forms and is almost never universally applicable. Something that sounds great when applied to one case can usually be flipped on its head with a thousand counterexamples. I'd rather listen to someone who was an expert in whatever problem domain I was seeking advice in than someone who demonstrated massive success in a completely different area, yet I see people do this all the time. Mark Cuban is regularly on CNBC discussing his stock picks while he has actually underperformed the markets for many years. Yet his opinions and advice on stock-picking are highly respected because he top-ticked the sale of a startup that no longer exists and hasn't really created anything lasting since. The Stripe founders I'm sure have incredible expertise in the payment and startup space and are clearly brilliant. Yet from reading this piece I can sense in a way that he himself probably can't, a sort of ignorance that comes from a lack of life experience. I wouldn't really be too interested in their ideas on most other subjects whereas I would be very interested in reading someone who (gasp!) hadn't created a 10-figure net worth before 30 if they had experience in that area. What a concept. I can't recall how many times I've looked back on a time I dismissed someone else's opinion only later to realize I was completely wrong. The realization that your opinions very often will prove incorrect and the associated behavioral change is what makes you wise, not the refusal to admit you are wrong and the dismissal of everyone who disagrees with you.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
drjesusphd 8y ago
> I’ve gotten to the point where I actually view people who listen to others and are open to changing their opinions when confronted with good advice as being much more intelligent than those who are sure they are right about everything all the time. I also find this to be a useful heuristic. Particularly "How seriously does this person take my ideas? When I'm wrong, do they make an effort to explain why? Are the open to me being right?" This works best when you're a student or otherwise new to something Obviously, it won't work when you have status over the person; they'll listen to you anyway.

imgabe 8y ago

You can disagree with someone about whether a piece of technology is important or not without regarding them a moral failure.

gfodor 8y ago
Where did the OP limit his claim to be about a specific thing like technology? And why did you interpret my comment as having universal applicability? There are categories of things which if you firmly believe that you are right and the other person is wrong in ascribing importance to them (following the OP's heuristic) you'd necessarily assume that person is a moral failure. For example, if I highly regard the ideas of a specific political philosophy, and others dismiss them as bad ideas that have been disregarded, it seems like a bad idea for me to conclude I'm correct in respecting them simply because people in my age group similarly hold those ideals in high regard. My point was that a heuristic that urges one to have confidence that they have "correct" value judgements simply due to their age is a bad rule to have in your mental model of how to navigate differences with others, even if it's not a hard one.
- imgabe 8y ago
  Context. Patrick Collison is famous around here for building a SaaS business and writing a lot about helping others to do so. This is Hacker News which focuses heavily on business and tech. > My point was that a heuristic that urges one to have confidence that they have "correct" value judgements simply due to their age is a bad rule to have in your mental model of how to navigate differences with others, even if it's not a hard one. The entire world nudges young people in the opposite direction from the very moment they're born. That nudging is frequently incorrect when it comes to technology, so some nudging in the direction of young people believing in themselves is appropriate. In 2006, there were a bunch of college students who thought Facebook was a pretty big deal. Most 50 year olds in 2006 probably would have disagreed and didn't see why it would be important to post pictures of your friends drinking online. The older people were wrong. It's not a value judgement. They weren't bad people because they were wrong about a technology trend. But they were still wrong. When any new thing comes along there's always a few older, well respected people who dismiss it and say it isn't important. They end up being wrong. It you want to be the one bringing those new things about, you need to learn to ignore those people, even though they're older than you.

tim333 8y ago

I imagine he's thinking of thing like doing a start up or getting into blockchain rather than say moral values.