4 ms·

While the quality of self-help material is variable, what I think is valuable (and I guess pretty American) is the focus on that which you can change for yourse

While the quality of self-help material is variable, what I think is valuable (and I guess pretty American) is the focus on that which you can change for yourself. It seems more popular recently to talk about external problems that you realistically can't impact ("why should anyone be a billionaire") rather than focus on what you can actually change ("how do I grow valuable skill sets and market myself better to increase my compensation.") Obviously, not every self-help book is going to be good, or right for you, and you may not absorb and implement it, but I'd much rather bet on someone who at least tries to steer their own ship.

KittenInABox 5y ago
If we never talk about external problems such as systems that make it impossible to meaningfully increase one's compensation, then no amount of change in self could actually fix anything. Let's say you're a disabled person who can't even get married because then you lose your income and therefore become financially dependent on your partner, which creates a super uncomfortable relationship between the two of you. What can you change yourself, or should you instead talk about the fact the government's laws and merit-gating has royally fucked you over and advocate for systemic changes? Maybe through writing a blog post or opinion article in a newspaper...
- BeetleB 5y ago
  > If we never talk about external problems such as systems that make it impossible to meaningfully increase one's compensation, then no amount of change in self could actually fix anything. This is merely arguing from extremes, and is responding to a position your parent did not take (i.e. strawman): He didn't say "never" or "always", he said "more popular" Also, I could make the equally correct/problematic statement: If we only talk about external problems such as systems that make it impossible to meaningfully increase one's compensation, then no amount of social reform will improve your condition. You need external things to change, but you also need to change yourself internally. The dispute is on how much of each.
CJefferson 5y ago
While America seems to spend a lot of time talking about "how to improve / change yourself", and the "American Dream", every study I've seen (for example https://www3.weforum.org/docs/Global_Social_Mobility_Report.pdf https://www3.weforum.org/docs/Global_Social_Mobility_Report.... ), shows it does poorly for social mobility.
- adolph 5y ago
  The two items seem not incongruent. According to that report, the US is a half standard deviation above the median of social mobility. It isn't charitable to characterize that as doing "poorly."
- xyzelement 5y ago
  I bet that people who subscribe to the mobility mindset are statistically more mobile than those who don't believe it's possible.
  - TrispusAttucks 5y ago
    Indeed. But revolutionary defeatism [1] is so in vogue at the moment. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_defeatism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_defeatism
- potatoman22 5y ago
  If one doesn't focus on improving themselves, then what do they do? Pass through life, hoping it will treat them well?

KittenInABox 5y ago

If we never talk about external problems such as systems that make it impossible to meaningfully increase one's compensation, then no amount of change in self could actually fix anything. Let's say you're a disabled person who can't even get married because then you lose your income and therefore become financially dependent on your partner, which creates a super uncomfortable relationship between the two of you. What can you change yourself, or should you instead talk about the fact the government's laws and merit-gating has royally fucked you over and advocate for systemic changes? Maybe through writing a blog post or opinion article in a newspaper...

BeetleB 5y ago
> If we never talk about external problems such as systems that make it impossible to meaningfully increase one's compensation, then no amount of change in self could actually fix anything. This is merely arguing from extremes, and is responding to a position your parent did not take (i.e. strawman): He didn't say "never" or "always", he said "more popular" Also, I could make the equally correct/problematic statement: If we only talk about external problems such as systems that make it impossible to meaningfully increase one's compensation, then no amount of social reform will improve your condition. You need external things to change, but you also need to change yourself internally. The dispute is on how much of each.

CJefferson 5y ago

While America seems to spend a lot of time talking about "how to improve / change yourself", and the "American Dream", every study I've seen (for example https://www3.weforum.org/docs/Global_Social_Mobility_Report.pdf https://www3.weforum.org/docs/Global_Social_Mobility_Report.... ), shows it does poorly for social mobility.

adolph 5y ago
The two items seem not incongruent. According to that report, the US is a half standard deviation above the median of social mobility. It isn't charitable to characterize that as doing "poorly."
xyzelement 5y ago
I bet that people who subscribe to the mobility mindset are statistically more mobile than those who don't believe it's possible.
- TrispusAttucks 5y ago
  Indeed. But revolutionary defeatism [1] is so in vogue at the moment. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_defeatism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_defeatism
potatoman22 5y ago
If one doesn't focus on improving themselves, then what do they do? Pass through life, hoping it will treat them well?