6 ms·

> Don't listen to PG, kids. Live the life you want to have now, not the life you think you'll want to have several decades out. Isn't there an in-between? My w

by bhupy 5y ago

> Don't listen to PG, kids. Live the life you want to have now, not the life you think you'll want to have several decades out. Isn't there an in-between? My wife and I both delay a little bit of gratification with the expectation that we'll have a better life in our mid-30's or early 40's. In other words, we're choosing not to live the life we want to have right now, because we're trading that off for a potentially better life X years from now (where in our case, X = 5-10 years). X can be whatever you want, and it's up to individuals (or families) to decide that for themselves. But once you do, delayed gratification is an important social concept; as evidenced by the marshmallow test administered in children. For adults, "rejecting the marshmallow" can mean working a little harder in your '20s, so that you may get 2 marshmallows when you're in your '30s — which for a lot of people is important as that's the age when they have children.

tidydata 5y ago
Having children means sharing your marshmallows. It’s also a lot easier to chase a kid in your 20s than your 30s. It’s also maturing, enjoyable, and spending time with them is the best part of the day. Not something many people say about work! Maybe when the work is truly meaningful (I wouldn’t know). The notion that people need to work through their 20s for this unknown future prize is silly and wasteful. Spending the prime years of your life slaving to a computer is something I think a lot of people will regret. So, no, I won’t listen to PG. My most fulfilling work is being a dad.
- bhupy 5y ago
  > Not something many people say about work! Maybe when the work is truly meaningful (I wouldn’t know). The vagueness of "work" in this article is (IMO) a feature, and not a bug. Raising your children can be great work, to your own point. You can't half-ass raising your kids, as you well know, and it sounds like you get the most purpose and fulfillment from doing that. What PG appears to be arguing is that, whether you're doing a "great" job of it depends on: 1) how hard you work on raising your kids, 2) your natural ability, and 3) effort — and I trust that you satisfy all 3 of those preconditions, as a dad. > The notion that people need to work through their 20s for this unknown future prize is silly and wasteful First of all, to call it an "unknown future prize" is a bit of a mischaracterization. If someone were to argue that one ought to spill their lives into their career with no well-defined end goal, then I'd agree that it's silly and wasteful. But if you actually have a clear view of what a desired end goal looks like (it could be anything: a house with a yard in the Bay Area, enough money to retire early, etc etc), it can be entirely reasonable to defer gratification. Keep in mind that in the experiment, the child knows that there's a second marshmallow coming if they wait. Adults need to know what their second marshmallow is before delaying the first one. Second of all, I don't think it's fair to make such a sweeping generalization for how other people ought to live their lives. The neat thing about PG's post is that it's sufficiently abstract that it can apply to anyone, regardless of what they consider "great work".
  - tidydata 5y ago
    But is _is_ an unknown future prize, and countless stories prove that. Pension funds go belly up, whole industries made obsolete, an accident/injury disrupts everything, etc. I think your premise of “telling people how to live their life” falls more on the popular notion that investment early in career, rather than family or life experience, is more important. I believe this is wrong and it’s repeated more frequently than my counterpoint!
    - bhupy 5y ago
      > But is _is_ an unknown future prize, and countless stories prove that. Pension funds go belly up, whole industries made obsolete, an accident/injury disrupts everything, etc. This is only an "unknown future prize" if the defined goal is very specifically to have a successful pension fund, or to thrive in a specific industry. Using the example of what makes you, personally, feel the most fulfilled: children die prematurely (disrupts everything), or they have developmental challenges that make it difficult to do much else in life. None of that changes the fact that you're probably still better off devoting your life right now to rearing children. You're absolutely correct that there's uncertainty in the future, but none of that refutes any of what I said in my comments, or PG wrote in his article. It's a "yes, and" addition, rather than a "no, but" refutation. YES, there's significant entropy in life, AND given that, the most reliable way to do "great work" is still <dot dot dot> (as laid out in PG's blog post). > I think your premise of “telling people how to live their life” falls more on the popular notion that investment early in career, rather than family or life experience, is more important. I believe this is wrong and it’s repeated more frequently than my counterpoint! I argued no such thing. It clearly bears repeating that the more abstract notion is that investment in XYZ early in your life, rather than ABC is more important. XYZ and ABC can be the exact same thing, if your circumstances permit; there's no requirement that they be different things. If you find the most fulfillment and joy in life raising children resources notwithstanding, then you can certainly start doing that early in your life. If you think that raising children will only be more fulfilling if you have some baseline threshold of wealth, then you may have to defer that in favor of a career. Again, it all depends on how you, as an individual (or as a family), defines XYZ and ABC. I have no problem with how people define XYZ and ABC. What I have a problem with is in telling people how they ought to define XYZ and ABC. Neither PG's post nor my comment did the latter.
- Godel_unicode 5y ago
  I worked very hard in my 20s and I'm extremely glad I did. The work was interesting, engaging, maturing, and super valuable for society. It also set me up with an extremely valuable skill set, of hard and soft skills, that are useful in both my professional and personal lives. This trend of saying you enjoyed your life and therefore yours was the only correct choice is extremely closed-minded, and tends to come from parents in particular a lot. What if instead you solicited the opinions of people whose life you clearly don't understand? Are you so scared of the idea that other choices made other people happy?
  - tidydata 5y ago
    I’m definitely not scared. Are you okay? I also totally understand being single, childless, and driven to a career. I’m happier now. Who is the one not listening to other’s opinions? You sure you understand?
    - Godel_unicode 5y ago
      "Maybe when the work is truly meaningful (I wouldn’t know)." But sure, have it your way.
- sharkweek 5y ago
  I want to make it very clear that I do not expect everyone to want kids, and I'm never ever one to say "oh you'll love kids once you have your own!" to anyone, but... I cannot understate for me personally how much having my own kids over the past few years has shifted my priorities. The best parts of my weeks are when I'm with my family all doing something fun together. Work is now only a means to provide and is not a source of personal fulfillment anymore (again, YMMV!!!!) It's hard to stay "extra motivated" at work now, though. I went from being willing to put in the long hours and weekends to barely being able to get 30-40 hours a week. But you know what? There are plenty of perfectly great jobs that allow for that. The place I'm currently working told me in the interview loop they can't compete with FAANG salary ranges, but they promised me total autonomy on when/where I work as well as great work-life balance, which has proven to be true.
- publicola1990 5y ago
  Framing it that way makes it seem that he's espousing a Stakhanovite approach.
nineplay 5y ago
It's not about YOLO, it's about looking at your life though a lens besides "work,work,work,save,save,save" When I was 25 I had the time and the money to take a couple of weeks off and travel. I wouldn't have stayed in the nicest hotels or eaten in fancy restaurants, but I could have done it. It would have had no negative impact on my career and my current financial status. What kept me from doing it wasn't a careful look at my life goals and the cost/benefits ratio, but a mental model that stopped at "Work hard now and you'll be rewarded I promise" I didn't see any accounting for that in PG's essay. "Great Men Work Hard And Succeed" is the only message I got.
- bhupy 5y ago
  I don't think we disagree here; my point is that there is a broad spectrum between "YOLO" and "work,work,work,save,save,save"; and that it's up to you to decide where on that spectrum you want to be. From PG's article, he acknowledges that the hard work is a necessary but not sufficient condition to do "great work" (in his words). "There are three ingredients in great work: natural ability, practice, and effort. You can do pretty well with just two, but to do the best work you need all three" The vagueness of "great work" means that it can apply to any kind of work. Raising children can be "great work". Writing a book can be "great work". Learning something new can be "great work". Traveling can be "great work", etc. > When I was 25 I had the time and the money to take a couple of weeks off and travel. I wouldn't have stayed in the nicest hotels or eaten in fancy restaurants, but I could have done it. It would have had no negative impact on my career and my current financial status. Great! And for you, forgoing a marshmallow means something very different from someone else. The advice in this article is sufficiently abstract, that when applied to the circumstances of your life, should still track consistently.
  - borroka 5y ago
    If a middle school student was to come to me, a hypothetical English teacher, with an essay including the following: "There are three ingredients in great work: natural ability, practice, and effort. You can do pretty well with just two, but to do the best work you need all three", I would tell them, my friend, come back with some ideas of yours, please do not list simplistic views just to get the nod of approval of your audience of middle-school students/ bored teachers/programmers. PS. We all have seen plenty of people who did great work with top natural abilities, little effort and little practice. Such is life. I had a similar reaction of disbelief when at a work-sponsored leadership development program, the instructor told us that one of the special traits of Fortune 500 CEOs (they all like to talk about CEOs) is empathy. It sounds good, yes it does; the only problem is that it contradicts what one can see with their own eyes every single day.
meheleventyone 5y ago
If you get used to looking 5-10 years ahead are you sure you'll stop and starting living that better life? Or will there just be more goals another 5-10 years ahead? I lost a whole bunch of friends in my 30s and nearly died myself a few weeks ago. Later on doesn't arrive for everyone. I don't think that means you should never delay gratification but just don't put all your eggs in the future basket.
- bhupy 5y ago
  Yeah, we don't disagree. Like I said, there's an "in-between". Always "living in the moment" can be bad, depending on what you want out of life. Always "living in the future" can also be bad, depending on what you want out of life. Ultimately, they both depend on the same thing: what you want out of life. The key is for everyone to define that goal for themselves; an exercise which is possibly the single hardest part of the human condition.
  - meheleventyone 5y ago
    The weird thing at least for me in reading that is I very rarely worry or even think as abstractly as what I want from life. My own take is that question comes very much from the living in the future side of things.
    - bhupy 5y ago
      "No answer" can be a perfectly acceptable answer to "what do I want out of life?" It can be a great way to live a life, and once you've decided that that's your answer, you'd obviously spend more of your mental capacity in the "living in the moment" side of the spectrum. That being said, it's an answer that has the possibility (though not a guarantee) of having very real negative consequences to one's future well-being. Individuals that choose to go that route should be responsible for those consequences, if any.
      - meheleventyone 5y ago
        Not thinking about it isn’t the same as deciding that there isn’t an answer. Nor does it preclude planning. It’s just not something that bothers me or seems important. I have more interesting existential thoughts when I think about the enormity of the universe. I also don’t see why you think there is risk in it. After all you can have a long term plan to do extremely dangerous things to self actualise. Both routes (a false dichotomy in itself) in fact have a possibility of having very real negative consequences even if your plans are dull.

by bhupy 5y ago

tidydata 5y ago

Having children means sharing your marshmallows. It’s also a lot easier to chase a kid in your 20s than your 30s. It’s also maturing, enjoyable, and spending time with them is the best part of the day. Not something many people say about work! Maybe when the work is truly meaningful (I wouldn’t know). The notion that people need to work through their 20s for this unknown future prize is silly and wasteful. Spending the prime years of your life slaving to a computer is something I think a lot of people will regret. So, no, I won’t listen to PG. My most fulfilling work is being a dad.

bhupy 5y ago
> Not something many people say about work! Maybe when the work is truly meaningful (I wouldn’t know). The vagueness of "work" in this article is (IMO) a feature, and not a bug. Raising your children can be great work, to your own point. You can't half-ass raising your kids, as you well know, and it sounds like you get the most purpose and fulfillment from doing that. What PG appears to be arguing is that, whether you're doing a "great" job of it depends on: 1) how hard you work on raising your kids, 2) your natural ability, and 3) effort — and I trust that you satisfy all 3 of those preconditions, as a dad. > The notion that people need to work through their 20s for this unknown future prize is silly and wasteful First of all, to call it an "unknown future prize" is a bit of a mischaracterization. If someone were to argue that one ought to spill their lives into their career with no well-defined end goal, then I'd agree that it's silly and wasteful. But if you actually have a clear view of what a desired end goal looks like (it could be anything: a house with a yard in the Bay Area, enough money to retire early, etc etc), it can be entirely reasonable to defer gratification. Keep in mind that in the experiment, the child knows that there's a second marshmallow coming if they wait. Adults need to know what their second marshmallow is before delaying the first one. Second of all, I don't think it's fair to make such a sweeping generalization for how other people ought to live their lives. The neat thing about PG's post is that it's sufficiently abstract that it can apply to anyone, regardless of what they consider "great work".
- tidydata 5y ago
  But is _is_ an unknown future prize, and countless stories prove that. Pension funds go belly up, whole industries made obsolete, an accident/injury disrupts everything, etc. I think your premise of “telling people how to live their life” falls more on the popular notion that investment early in career, rather than family or life experience, is more important. I believe this is wrong and it’s repeated more frequently than my counterpoint!
  - bhupy 5y ago
    > But is _is_ an unknown future prize, and countless stories prove that. Pension funds go belly up, whole industries made obsolete, an accident/injury disrupts everything, etc. This is only an "unknown future prize" if the defined goal is very specifically to have a successful pension fund, or to thrive in a specific industry. Using the example of what makes you, personally, feel the most fulfilled: children die prematurely (disrupts everything), or they have developmental challenges that make it difficult to do much else in life. None of that changes the fact that you're probably still better off devoting your life right now to rearing children. You're absolutely correct that there's uncertainty in the future, but none of that refutes any of what I said in my comments, or PG wrote in his article. It's a "yes, and" addition, rather than a "no, but" refutation. YES, there's significant entropy in life, AND given that, the most reliable way to do "great work" is still <dot dot dot> (as laid out in PG's blog post). > I think your premise of “telling people how to live their life” falls more on the popular notion that investment early in career, rather than family or life experience, is more important. I believe this is wrong and it’s repeated more frequently than my counterpoint! I argued no such thing. It clearly bears repeating that the more abstract notion is that investment in XYZ early in your life, rather than ABC is more important. XYZ and ABC can be the exact same thing, if your circumstances permit; there's no requirement that they be different things. If you find the most fulfillment and joy in life raising children resources notwithstanding, then you can certainly start doing that early in your life. If you think that raising children will only be more fulfilling if you have some baseline threshold of wealth, then you may have to defer that in favor of a career. Again, it all depends on how you, as an individual (or as a family), defines XYZ and ABC. I have no problem with how people define XYZ and ABC. What I have a problem with is in telling people how they ought to define XYZ and ABC. Neither PG's post nor my comment did the latter.
Godel_unicode 5y ago
I worked very hard in my 20s and I'm extremely glad I did. The work was interesting, engaging, maturing, and super valuable for society. It also set me up with an extremely valuable skill set, of hard and soft skills, that are useful in both my professional and personal lives. This trend of saying you enjoyed your life and therefore yours was the only correct choice is extremely closed-minded, and tends to come from parents in particular a lot. What if instead you solicited the opinions of people whose life you clearly don't understand? Are you so scared of the idea that other choices made other people happy?
- tidydata 5y ago
  I’m definitely not scared. Are you okay? I also totally understand being single, childless, and driven to a career. I’m happier now. Who is the one not listening to other’s opinions? You sure you understand?
  - Godel_unicode 5y ago
    "Maybe when the work is truly meaningful (I wouldn’t know)." But sure, have it your way.
sharkweek 5y ago
I want to make it very clear that I do not expect everyone to want kids, and I'm never ever one to say "oh you'll love kids once you have your own!" to anyone, but... I cannot understate for me personally how much having my own kids over the past few years has shifted my priorities. The best parts of my weeks are when I'm with my family all doing something fun together. Work is now only a means to provide and is not a source of personal fulfillment anymore (again, YMMV!!!!) It's hard to stay "extra motivated" at work now, though. I went from being willing to put in the long hours and weekends to barely being able to get 30-40 hours a week. But you know what? There are plenty of perfectly great jobs that allow for that. The place I'm currently working told me in the interview loop they can't compete with FAANG salary ranges, but they promised me total autonomy on when/where I work as well as great work-life balance, which has proven to be true.
publicola1990 5y ago
Framing it that way makes it seem that he's espousing a Stakhanovite approach.

nineplay 5y ago

It's not about YOLO, it's about looking at your life though a lens besides "work,work,work,save,save,save" When I was 25 I had the time and the money to take a couple of weeks off and travel. I wouldn't have stayed in the nicest hotels or eaten in fancy restaurants, but I could have done it. It would have had no negative impact on my career and my current financial status. What kept me from doing it wasn't a careful look at my life goals and the cost/benefits ratio, but a mental model that stopped at "Work hard now and you'll be rewarded I promise" I didn't see any accounting for that in PG's essay. "Great Men Work Hard And Succeed" is the only message I got.

bhupy 5y ago
I don't think we disagree here; my point is that there is a broad spectrum between "YOLO" and "work,work,work,save,save,save"; and that it's up to you to decide where on that spectrum you want to be. From PG's article, he acknowledges that the hard work is a necessary but not sufficient condition to do "great work" (in his words). "There are three ingredients in great work: natural ability, practice, and effort. You can do pretty well with just two, but to do the best work you need all three" The vagueness of "great work" means that it can apply to any kind of work. Raising children can be "great work". Writing a book can be "great work". Learning something new can be "great work". Traveling can be "great work", etc. > When I was 25 I had the time and the money to take a couple of weeks off and travel. I wouldn't have stayed in the nicest hotels or eaten in fancy restaurants, but I could have done it. It would have had no negative impact on my career and my current financial status. Great! And for you, forgoing a marshmallow means something very different from someone else. The advice in this article is sufficiently abstract, that when applied to the circumstances of your life, should still track consistently.
- borroka 5y ago
  If a middle school student was to come to me, a hypothetical English teacher, with an essay including the following: "There are three ingredients in great work: natural ability, practice, and effort. You can do pretty well with just two, but to do the best work you need all three", I would tell them, my friend, come back with some ideas of yours, please do not list simplistic views just to get the nod of approval of your audience of middle-school students/ bored teachers/programmers. PS. We all have seen plenty of people who did great work with top natural abilities, little effort and little practice. Such is life. I had a similar reaction of disbelief when at a work-sponsored leadership development program, the instructor told us that one of the special traits of Fortune 500 CEOs (they all like to talk about CEOs) is empathy. It sounds good, yes it does; the only problem is that it contradicts what one can see with their own eyes every single day.

meheleventyone 5y ago

If you get used to looking 5-10 years ahead are you sure you'll stop and starting living that better life? Or will there just be more goals another 5-10 years ahead? I lost a whole bunch of friends in my 30s and nearly died myself a few weeks ago. Later on doesn't arrive for everyone. I don't think that means you should never delay gratification but just don't put all your eggs in the future basket.

bhupy 5y ago
Yeah, we don't disagree. Like I said, there's an "in-between". Always "living in the moment" can be bad, depending on what you want out of life. Always "living in the future" can also be bad, depending on what you want out of life. Ultimately, they both depend on the same thing: what you want out of life. The key is for everyone to define that goal for themselves; an exercise which is possibly the single hardest part of the human condition.
- meheleventyone 5y ago
  The weird thing at least for me in reading that is I very rarely worry or even think as abstractly as what I want from life. My own take is that question comes very much from the living in the future side of things.
  - bhupy 5y ago
    "No answer" can be a perfectly acceptable answer to "what do I want out of life?" It can be a great way to live a life, and once you've decided that that's your answer, you'd obviously spend more of your mental capacity in the "living in the moment" side of the spectrum. That being said, it's an answer that has the possibility (though not a guarantee) of having very real negative consequences to one's future well-being. Individuals that choose to go that route should be responsible for those consequences, if any.
    - meheleventyone 5y ago
      Not thinking about it isn’t the same as deciding that there isn’t an answer. Nor does it preclude planning. It’s just not something that bothers me or seems important. I have more interesting existential thoughts when I think about the enormity of the universe. I also don’t see why you think there is risk in it. After all you can have a long term plan to do extremely dangerous things to self actualise. Both routes (a false dichotomy in itself) in fact have a possibility of having very real negative consequences even if your plans are dull.