3 ms·

I agree. I had brain surgery recently (small tumor), and all I could do for the week after is pretty much stare into space and think. I came upon a series of ep

I agree. I had brain surgery recently (small tumor), and all I could do for the week after is pretty much stare into space and think. I came upon a series of epiphanies/hasty generalizations along those lines that seem pretty correct to me now: 1. Most people don't like what they do enough to do it when nobody's asking them to do it. 2. Most people can't singlehandedly start projects that require a lot of work and have uncertain reward. 3. Among those who enthusiastically do, very few can complete those projects. 4. Institutions like schools and corporations are quite reasonably based around this assumption, and work very well for most people. They set up worthwhile hoops for people to jump through. 5. In most institutions, the way to judge someone's worth is "What nifty, pre-existing hoops that I know about did you opt to jump through?" If it's something weird like getting a book published or starting a software business, it doesn't count. The judge can't use this sort of thing in comparing one candidate to another because there are few other candidates who have done the same OR because the judge is possibly someone for whom the generalization in 1-2 applies and just doesn't get it. I don't know a lot of other people my age who have real passion about what they do and can pull through on significant projects that they start themselves. Thinking I was going to die for a few days before I learned of my prognosis made me realize that rather than feeling weird and timid about this distinction, I should see it as kind of a superpower and go more gung-ho on some of my more successful endeavors. What's also cool is that there are companies and individuals that can't afford to judge people according to the criteria in #5. And that isn't to say that it's not occasionally worth jumping through other people's hoops when it's not hurting anything :)

unalone 18y ago
That last thing you stated is what I consider to be the ultimate check in capitalism, the thing that makes the system work. You can't set up a corrupt entity that lasts beyond a point, because things evolve too quickly. Also, along the lines of 2 and 3, I think that's what explains why young people tend to have such uncommon successes of such magnitude. It's not because of drive per se: people of all ages have drive. But it's because the fact that there's such an imbalance in the system that makes people move forward. I had an epiphany recently that, next to yours, seems pretty stupid and shallow, but it's an epiphany that moved me nonetheless. It was the realization that, despite all the stuff that I'd tried to do, all the stuff I thought I could do, there were still some pretty basic social things I would be incapable of, if I kept along the route I was going. And I didn't like that. So I've started working out, eating more healthily, trying to normalize a bit in preparation for college. And what I've found is that while I'm doing that stuff, I find getting work done to be far easier, too. The two go hand-in-hand. And it's at young ages that trying to show off in shallow ways really stays a priority. It's like the article about Zuckerberg that was on here a week ago. When he was in high school, he wasn't a typical coder: he was an active fencer in the top levels of the USFA, and he was in quite a few social clubs, too. This isn't a case of somebody who's a brilliant coder going off and writing code. That doesn't happen often at all, not even when you look at success stories in Silicon Valley. Rather, he was a very bright person who dabbled in a lot of things, who had an idea and who did whatever he could to bring that idea to fruition. I think the part of that story that fascinated me the most was the part describing how he began Facebook because his girlfriend snubbed him. What an absolutely honest start to a site: something about that story felt absolutely real to me.

unalone 18y ago

That last thing you stated is what I consider to be the ultimate check in capitalism, the thing that makes the system work. You can't set up a corrupt entity that lasts beyond a point, because things evolve too quickly. Also, along the lines of 2 and 3, I think that's what explains why young people tend to have such uncommon successes of such magnitude. It's not because of drive per se: people of all ages have drive. But it's because the fact that there's such an imbalance in the system that makes people move forward. I had an epiphany recently that, next to yours, seems pretty stupid and shallow, but it's an epiphany that moved me nonetheless. It was the realization that, despite all the stuff that I'd tried to do, all the stuff I thought I could do, there were still some pretty basic social things I would be incapable of, if I kept along the route I was going. And I didn't like that. So I've started working out, eating more healthily, trying to normalize a bit in preparation for college. And what I've found is that while I'm doing that stuff, I find getting work done to be far easier, too. The two go hand-in-hand. And it's at young ages that trying to show off in shallow ways really stays a priority. It's like the article about Zuckerberg that was on here a week ago. When he was in high school, he wasn't a typical coder: he was an active fencer in the top levels of the USFA, and he was in quite a few social clubs, too. This isn't a case of somebody who's a brilliant coder going off and writing code. That doesn't happen often at all, not even when you look at success stories in Silicon Valley. Rather, he was a very bright person who dabbled in a lot of things, who had an idea and who did whatever he could to bring that idea to fruition. I think the part of that story that fascinated me the most was the part describing how he began Facebook because his girlfriend snubbed him. What an absolutely honest start to a site: something about that story felt absolutely real to me.