4 ms·

> They tend to be more chaotic, less rational (sometimes dangerously so), often dickish but always displaying a vision of life that is deeply felt and never ste

> They tend to be more chaotic, less rational (sometimes dangerously so), often dickish but always displaying a vision of life that is deeply felt and never sterile. Here's a chain of logic I'm pondering: 1. Few things cut as deeply and personally as failure, especially failure where the stakes are high. 2. That implies that our failures are our most meaningful, individual experiences. 3. Which in turn implies that a life with a minimum of failure is a life with little meaning or individuality to it. 4. Does that therefore mean that those who have failed the most, who have the greatest ratio of failure to success, are the ones who are living life most vividly? How should I balance that against the obvious reality that failing sucks? In other words, if your goal is to live a unique life, the Anna Karenina principle [1] implies that you should aim for unhappiness. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Karenina_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Karenina_principle

clairity 6y ago
that's putting the causality backwards. you should aim to have interesting experiences and thoughts. the failure and unhappiness will follow if that's what's in store. if you aim for failure and unhappiness (the poor proxy), it's likely you'll miss out on the interesting experiences and thoughts, which is the meaningful part. this is, again, how we get unintended (and unwanted) consequences in so many aspects of our lives (partisanship is another good example).
- munificent 6y ago
  > that's putting the causality backwards. Sure, I didn't necessarily claim that my list was literally true. Just a thought exercise. > you should aim to have interesting experiences and thoughts. I think is as prone to Goodhart's Law as my suggestion to aim for unhappiness. If you try to deliberately aim for interesting experiences and avoid uninteresting ones, you'll need to gather some data first. So you ask around and see what experiences other people find interesting. But, of course, what could be more uninteresting than doing what everyone else thinks is interesting?
  - clairity 6y ago
    > "But, of course, what could be more uninteresting than doing what everyone else thinks is interesting?" so why define your happiness primarily on what others think? a false premise, at the very least (but one many of us do seem to fall for from time to time). as @Bakary originally suggested, interesting lives don't seem to be led so deliberately.
CPLX 6y ago
If that’s true than the most meaningful failure will be the one with the highest stakes, which is your own death. Following from that first principle you rationally conclude you should kill yourself today. Which points to a useful insight — when the real world does not agree with logic, examine your first principles.
- munificent 6y ago
  Ah, no. The rational conclusion is that you should take the world down with you. Which, I certainly hope would be unsuccessful. But it would definitely be interesting!

clairity 6y ago

that's putting the causality backwards. you should aim to have interesting experiences and thoughts. the failure and unhappiness will follow if that's what's in store. if you aim for failure and unhappiness (the poor proxy), it's likely you'll miss out on the interesting experiences and thoughts, which is the meaningful part. this is, again, how we get unintended (and unwanted) consequences in so many aspects of our lives (partisanship is another good example).

munificent 6y ago
> that's putting the causality backwards. Sure, I didn't necessarily claim that my list was literally true. Just a thought exercise. > you should aim to have interesting experiences and thoughts. I think is as prone to Goodhart's Law as my suggestion to aim for unhappiness. If you try to deliberately aim for interesting experiences and avoid uninteresting ones, you'll need to gather some data first. So you ask around and see what experiences other people find interesting. But, of course, what could be more uninteresting than doing what everyone else thinks is interesting?
- clairity 6y ago
  > "But, of course, what could be more uninteresting than doing what everyone else thinks is interesting?" so why define your happiness primarily on what others think? a false premise, at the very least (but one many of us do seem to fall for from time to time). as @Bakary originally suggested, interesting lives don't seem to be led so deliberately.

CPLX 6y ago

If that’s true than the most meaningful failure will be the one with the highest stakes, which is your own death. Following from that first principle you rationally conclude you should kill yourself today. Which points to a useful insight — when the real world does not agree with logic, examine your first principles.

munificent 6y ago
Ah, no. The rational conclusion is that you should take the world down with you. Which, I certainly hope would be unsuccessful. But it would definitely be interesting!