8 ms·

Harsh Truths That Will Make You a Better Person

66 points by manx 4y ago

keybored 4y ago
Such a Fight Club article.
- adamnemecek 4y ago
  This summarizes it so well. There’s this type of guys who think that any of this is insightful.
- triceratops 4y ago
  Funnily, the article references Fight Club to reject one main character's central message: "For instance, some people want to respond to that speech with Tyler Durden's line from Fight Club: "You are not your job." But, well, actually, you totally are. Granted, your "job" and your means of employment might not be the same thing, but in both cases, you are nothing more than the sum total of your useful skills. For instance, being a good mother is a job that requires a skill. It's something a person can do that is useful to other members of society. But make no mistake: Your "job" -- the useful thing you do for other people -- is all you are... Tyler said, "You are not your job," but he also founded and ran a successful soap company and became the head of an international social and political movement. He was totally his job."
  - MrVandemar 4y ago
    You misunderstand Tyler's philosophy -- he's railing against the idea your job and your identity should be the same thing. They definitely shouldn't be. Here's a hypothetical concersation, loosely cribbed from an old crimethink comic... Alice: Hello Bob, nice to meet you. What do you do? Bob: I'm a GoNodeRust programmer at StillCompiling Co. Nice to meet you too. What do you do? Alice: I knit these jumpers for friends. I go jogging twice a week and I'm 3rd dan in karate. I self publish romance stories. I volunteer at a charity shop on Tuesdays. I'm reading "Pride and Prejudice" for the 19th time and I'm half way through. I'm restoring an old chair I found in an op-shop. Bob: No really, what do you do? The things Alice does are part of who she is, and how she defines herself: she does things for friends. She writes. She reads. She's practical and does stuff with her hands. Alice's job is a 4-day a week receptionist at BoringAccountingFirm Inc. She's good at her job, and it keeps the lights on, and food on the table ... But to answer the question "What do you do?" or even "Who are you?" with your job is often selling yourself very short.
    - triceratops 4y ago
      The author's definition of "job" happens to match yours. "Granted, your "job" and your means of employment might not be the same thing, but in both cases, you are nothing more than the sum total of your useful skills." (emphasis mine). In your example, Alice knows how to knit, do karate, write, work out, work in a shop, wood restoration, and be a receptionist. Bob may have have other skills but polite conversation ain't one of them. It's ok for people to really be attached to their job if that's what they want. Most jobs require useful skills that people work hard to attain. Alice's identity is still made up of things she does or can do.
juanci_to 4y ago
Add [2012] to the title
jleyank 4y ago
How about a simpler mantra: whenever possible, don’t be an asshole. Whenever possible, don’t work for one.
- pringlepong 4y ago
  We all adhere to that mantra already. That's why we're not being assholes to each other, we're just being assertive/straight-talking/pragmatic/realistic/tough-love. And if we were being an asshole, it was unavoidable / necessary in that situation. And if it wasn't, it was just a rare slip-up on our part, we're not normally like that, everyone slips up sometimes, to err is human, and only a total asshole would call us an asshole for such an trivial and inevitable lapse in our normally-impeccable judgement.
  - unsupp0rted 4y ago
    My only defense for these situations is to stop and genuinely consider whether I was being an asshole and if so, to say so loudly and categorically and apologize for the inevitable lapse in my normally mediocre judgement.
- dqpb 4y ago
  There are many axes right? Niceness, Competency, Action, etc. Surely each one matters.
escapedmoose 4y ago
It’s like Diane’s response when Bojack Horseman asks if he’s “a good person, deep down”: “I don’t really think there is a deep down. I think we are just the things we do.” That line really resonated with me. It stings, but it also motivates. I think if more people recognized it, they might do more good things (and/or stop being so hard on themselves if they’re already in the habit of doing good things).
- dqpb 4y ago
  I would say there is a deep down, with an infinite range of subtleties, but it’s ultimately discretized into the things we do. Moreover, the whole point of anything happening deep down, is that it results in us doing something.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- derbOac 4y ago
  I think there's something about this article that isn't just off, but encourages a sort of psychopathy-victim dynamic. Where it oversimplifies reality, just for a few examples: What about cases where people take credit for what others do? What about when people prevent others from doing things, so as to create artificial scarcity? Are others really knowledgeable about the long-term value of something to themselves? Are actors rational? Just for instance: all of the characters in that Glengarry Glen Ross scene are white. What if that character decided blacks are worthless because no one wants to do business with a black person? Do we just passively shrug and say that's reasonable, if true? What about the long-term consequences of a workplace environment like the one in the film? Is there another way of doing it? What about the higher-order value of sales benefiting that company? I think there's a certain false wisdom about the perspective of the article that rings hollow to me at this stage. Like, it's not just cold or harsh, but false. Not too long ago there was an article posted here at HN about a sort of bias to see cynicism as intelligent, and I guess I see this as part of that pattern. I've met too many people in my life that justify rewarded narrowmindedness, bigotry, incompetence, or psychopathy in terms of "how life is". Maybe at some level that's true but to me it leads to a certain psychopathic brand of meaningless tautology in which we're all either swindlers or marks.
atom_arranger 4y ago
Similar to this article: The first few episodes of the Cracked podcast are pretty interesting.
8bitsrule 4y ago
In Childhood's End, Arthur Clarke wrote: "No utopia can ever give satisfaction to everyone, all the time. As their material conditions improve, men raise their sights and become discontented with power and possessions that once would have seemed beyond their wildest dreams. And even when the external world has granted all it can, there still remain the searchings of the mind and the longings of the heart." A century ago "harsh truths" pushed child laborers into mines and mills. Those whose minds are searching and hearts are longing also need intangible benefits for which "What You Are Inside" very very much matters, despite the reality tunnel of the Cracked Philosopher. Great parents and teachers know this.
- throwawayboise 4y ago
  "Harsh truths" got us to the point where children don't have to work in mines and mills anymore.
ilrwbwrkhv 4y ago
I remember this article from 2012. Had a major effect on my life.
camoufleur 4y ago
Rene Daumal quote with a similar message: I am dead because I lack desire, I lack desire because I think I possess, I think I possess because I do not try to give, In trying to give, you see that you have nothing, Seeing that you have nothing, you try to give of yourself, Trying to give of yourself, you see that you are nothing, Seeing that you are nothing, you desire to become, In desiring to become, you begin to live.
SpikeDad 4y ago
Stopped reading after the first "harsh truth". In no way does the scenario described have any relevance to life. Period.
mbrodersen 4y ago
What a great read. The author truly gets it.
adamnemecek 4y ago
What a shitty article.
ThisIsMyAltFace 4y ago
People who like to tell "Harsh Truths" do it because they like to be harsh, they don't really care about the truth.
known 4y ago
[dead]
winternett 4y ago
People in this world often convince themselves they're religious, but under cover they operate in some of the most spineless and inconsiderate ways... It's one of the big contradictions in life. Do you save the environment? Or do you sell people cars (which ultimately destroy the environment and create toxic waste) under the guise of "saving the environment"? Do you act like you're a lion that really cares about gazelle lives being protected? This is the conflict of selflessness we are constantly presented with. There is a way to succeed while living well and not being a total douchebag, especially if you can ignore the fact that many won't like you, that you won't have extreme wealth, and that you may never become famous... It's a much better way to live if you are indeed a "spiritual" or somewhat ethical person. The apex/alpha mentality is very toxic and destructive. Even though many people adore it and exalt this brand of selfish/egotistical bad behavior, the damage it does to society and others far exceeds it's benefits in material gains. Material things only have temporary value, your soul (or legacy if you're not spiritual) however can potentially infinite value to others. My recommendation is for people to keep those 2 aspects in balance... That way you won't have to ask for forgiveness or regret your life on your death bed.
- walkhour 4y ago
  > People in this world often convince themselves they're religious, but under cover they operate in some of the most spineless and inconsiderate ways... It's one of the big contradictions in life. You can generalize this to the whole population. Average people, ambitious, criminals, murderers, rapists they all think they are good people. And they aren't better than the religious people on which you focus.
astrange 4y ago
Eh, this is not great. It's funny that it links to Last Psychiatrist, an early version of modern bro Substacks whose main thing was calling you a narcissist and constantly using rhetorical techniques like "I can tell you believe X, don't you? Huh? Huh? Well too bad it's actually Y!" and I'm like "but I don't believe X". > The World Only Cares About What It Can Get from You > What You Produce Does Not Have to Make Money, But It Does Have to Benefit People I think these are conflicting… > What You Are Inside Only Matters Because of What It Makes You Do This one's true though.
- em-bee 4y ago
  there is no conflict. money is not the only benefit others can get from your work. if you run a soup kitchen it will certainly benefit people even if it doesn't make money. for me the whole purpose of life is to make a positive contribution to society. that can take many forms
  - astrange 4y ago
    The conflict is between “the world is just trying to rip you off” and “you should work to benefit society”.
    - em-bee 4y ago
      The World Only Cares About What It Can Get from You is not the same thing as the world is just trying to rip you off
    - __B_B__ 4y ago
      You're assuming "the world" and "society" to be harmonious concepts but in the worldview of the author they're not, and therefore, for him, there is no contradiction. You will see it in the way he describes working together to meet basic needs at the end of point 6. He says society is a system for meeting needs. The world presents a set of problems and society presents a set of solutions through it's behavioral demands. The rest of the article is just him rationalizing the demands and the repercussions of not meeting them but the underlying assertions he is making are these: That humans are not a part of the world. They are just in it and afflicted by the requirements of being there. That society is a social technology which partitions us off and functions to preserve us therein. Therefore any demands it makes or repercussions it inflicts are legitimate and bound up with your survival and that the sooner you get on board, the sooner you will be "a better person". Another dead give away is the fact that "better" is a completely subjective evaluation, but he kind of buries the lede on that one and goes on to talk about "society" in the singular, probably knowing full well that the reader will just project their own subjective definition.
raldi 4y ago
> Everyone who watched that video instantly became a little happier Anyone remember what the video was back when it used to work?
nnoitra 4y ago
" Because the girl in the bookstore that you've been daydreaming about moisturizes her face for an hour every night and feels guilty when she eats anything other than salad for lunch. She's going to be a surgeon in 10 years. What do you do? " Oh yeah, every cute girl is going to come up with AGI or become a surgeon it's only the guys that are worthless and bringing nothing to the table. The girl in the bookstore loves handsome men and she barely cares about his GPA. This idea that women see right through you needs to die. It's mostly about looks.
- aliswe 4y ago
  He is strawmanning someone in the article, quoting them, but doesn't seem that far away from your position: "Who is THIS guy to tell ME how to live? Oh, like he's so high and mighty! It's just some dumb writer on the Internet! I'm going to go dig up something on him that reassures me that he's stupid, and that everything he's saying is stupid! This guy is so pretentious, it makes me puke!"
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- human_person 4y ago
  “moisturizes her face for an hour every night and feels guilty when she eats anything other than salad for lunch” He’s also saying that good looks/being cute take effort.

66 points by manx 4y ago

keybored 4y ago

Such a Fight Club article.

adamnemecek 4y ago
This summarizes it so well. There’s this type of guys who think that any of this is insightful.
triceratops 4y ago
Funnily, the article references Fight Club to reject one main character's central message: "For instance, some people want to respond to that speech with Tyler Durden's line from Fight Club: "You are not your job." But, well, actually, you totally are. Granted, your "job" and your means of employment might not be the same thing, but in both cases, you are nothing more than the sum total of your useful skills. For instance, being a good mother is a job that requires a skill. It's something a person can do that is useful to other members of society. But make no mistake: Your "job" -- the useful thing you do for other people -- is all you are... Tyler said, "You are not your job," but he also founded and ran a successful soap company and became the head of an international social and political movement. He was totally his job."
- MrVandemar 4y ago
  You misunderstand Tyler's philosophy -- he's railing against the idea your job and your identity should be the same thing. They definitely shouldn't be. Here's a hypothetical concersation, loosely cribbed from an old crimethink comic... Alice: Hello Bob, nice to meet you. What do you do? Bob: I'm a GoNodeRust programmer at StillCompiling Co. Nice to meet you too. What do you do? Alice: I knit these jumpers for friends. I go jogging twice a week and I'm 3rd dan in karate. I self publish romance stories. I volunteer at a charity shop on Tuesdays. I'm reading "Pride and Prejudice" for the 19th time and I'm half way through. I'm restoring an old chair I found in an op-shop. Bob: No really, what do you do? The things Alice does are part of who she is, and how she defines herself: she does things for friends. She writes. She reads. She's practical and does stuff with her hands. Alice's job is a 4-day a week receptionist at BoringAccountingFirm Inc. She's good at her job, and it keeps the lights on, and food on the table ... But to answer the question "What do you do?" or even "Who are you?" with your job is often selling yourself very short.
  - triceratops 4y ago
    The author's definition of "job" happens to match yours. "Granted, your "job" and your means of employment might not be the same thing, but in both cases, you are nothing more than the sum total of your useful skills." (emphasis mine). In your example, Alice knows how to knit, do karate, write, work out, work in a shop, wood restoration, and be a receptionist. Bob may have have other skills but polite conversation ain't one of them. It's ok for people to really be attached to their job if that's what they want. Most jobs require useful skills that people work hard to attain. Alice's identity is still made up of things she does or can do.

juanci_to 4y ago

Add [2012] to the title

jleyank 4y ago

How about a simpler mantra: whenever possible, don’t be an asshole. Whenever possible, don’t work for one.

pringlepong 4y ago
We all adhere to that mantra already. That's why we're not being assholes to each other, we're just being assertive/straight-talking/pragmatic/realistic/tough-love. And if we were being an asshole, it was unavoidable / necessary in that situation. And if it wasn't, it was just a rare slip-up on our part, we're not normally like that, everyone slips up sometimes, to err is human, and only a total asshole would call us an asshole for such an trivial and inevitable lapse in our normally-impeccable judgement.
- unsupp0rted 4y ago
  My only defense for these situations is to stop and genuinely consider whether I was being an asshole and if so, to say so loudly and categorically and apologize for the inevitable lapse in my normally mediocre judgement.
dqpb 4y ago
There are many axes right? Niceness, Competency, Action, etc. Surely each one matters.

escapedmoose 4y ago

It’s like Diane’s response when Bojack Horseman asks if he’s “a good person, deep down”: “I don’t really think there is a deep down. I think we are just the things we do.” That line really resonated with me. It stings, but it also motivates. I think if more people recognized it, they might do more good things (and/or stop being so hard on themselves if they’re already in the habit of doing good things).

dqpb 4y ago
I would say there is a deep down, with an infinite range of subtleties, but it’s ultimately discretized into the things we do. Moreover, the whole point of anything happening deep down, is that it results in us doing something.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
derbOac 4y ago
I think there's something about this article that isn't just off, but encourages a sort of psychopathy-victim dynamic. Where it oversimplifies reality, just for a few examples: What about cases where people take credit for what others do? What about when people prevent others from doing things, so as to create artificial scarcity? Are others really knowledgeable about the long-term value of something to themselves? Are actors rational? Just for instance: all of the characters in that Glengarry Glen Ross scene are white. What if that character decided blacks are worthless because no one wants to do business with a black person? Do we just passively shrug and say that's reasonable, if true? What about the long-term consequences of a workplace environment like the one in the film? Is there another way of doing it? What about the higher-order value of sales benefiting that company? I think there's a certain false wisdom about the perspective of the article that rings hollow to me at this stage. Like, it's not just cold or harsh, but false. Not too long ago there was an article posted here at HN about a sort of bias to see cynicism as intelligent, and I guess I see this as part of that pattern. I've met too many people in my life that justify rewarded narrowmindedness, bigotry, incompetence, or psychopathy in terms of "how life is". Maybe at some level that's true but to me it leads to a certain psychopathic brand of meaningless tautology in which we're all either swindlers or marks.

atom_arranger 4y ago

Similar to this article: The first few episodes of the Cracked podcast are pretty interesting.

8bitsrule 4y ago

In Childhood's End, Arthur Clarke wrote: "No utopia can ever give satisfaction to everyone, all the time. As their material conditions improve, men raise their sights and become discontented with power and possessions that once would have seemed beyond their wildest dreams. And even when the external world has granted all it can, there still remain the searchings of the mind and the longings of the heart." A century ago "harsh truths" pushed child laborers into mines and mills. Those whose minds are searching and hearts are longing also need intangible benefits for which "What You Are Inside" very very much matters, despite the reality tunnel of the Cracked Philosopher. Great parents and teachers know this.

throwawayboise 4y ago
"Harsh truths" got us to the point where children don't have to work in mines and mills anymore.

ilrwbwrkhv 4y ago

I remember this article from 2012. Had a major effect on my life.

camoufleur 4y ago

Rene Daumal quote with a similar message: I am dead because I lack desire, I lack desire because I think I possess, I think I possess because I do not try to give, In trying to give, you see that you have nothing, Seeing that you have nothing, you try to give of yourself, Trying to give of yourself, you see that you are nothing, Seeing that you are nothing, you desire to become, In desiring to become, you begin to live.

SpikeDad 4y ago

Stopped reading after the first "harsh truth". In no way does the scenario described have any relevance to life. Period.

mbrodersen 4y ago

What a great read. The author truly gets it.

adamnemecek 4y ago

What a shitty article.

ThisIsMyAltFace 4y ago

People who like to tell "Harsh Truths" do it because they like to be harsh, they don't really care about the truth.

known 4y ago

[dead]

winternett 4y ago

People in this world often convince themselves they're religious, but under cover they operate in some of the most spineless and inconsiderate ways... It's one of the big contradictions in life. Do you save the environment? Or do you sell people cars (which ultimately destroy the environment and create toxic waste) under the guise of "saving the environment"? Do you act like you're a lion that really cares about gazelle lives being protected? This is the conflict of selflessness we are constantly presented with. There is a way to succeed while living well and not being a total douchebag, especially if you can ignore the fact that many won't like you, that you won't have extreme wealth, and that you may never become famous... It's a much better way to live if you are indeed a "spiritual" or somewhat ethical person. The apex/alpha mentality is very toxic and destructive. Even though many people adore it and exalt this brand of selfish/egotistical bad behavior, the damage it does to society and others far exceeds it's benefits in material gains. Material things only have temporary value, your soul (or legacy if you're not spiritual) however can potentially infinite value to others. My recommendation is for people to keep those 2 aspects in balance... That way you won't have to ask for forgiveness or regret your life on your death bed.

walkhour 4y ago
> People in this world often convince themselves they're religious, but under cover they operate in some of the most spineless and inconsiderate ways... It's one of the big contradictions in life. You can generalize this to the whole population. Average people, ambitious, criminals, murderers, rapists they all think they are good people. And they aren't better than the religious people on which you focus.

astrange 4y ago

Eh, this is not great. It's funny that it links to Last Psychiatrist, an early version of modern bro Substacks whose main thing was calling you a narcissist and constantly using rhetorical techniques like "I can tell you believe X, don't you? Huh? Huh? Well too bad it's actually Y!" and I'm like "but I don't believe X". > The World Only Cares About What It Can Get from You > What You Produce Does Not Have to Make Money, But It Does Have to Benefit People I think these are conflicting… > What You Are Inside Only Matters Because of What It Makes You Do This one's true though.

em-bee 4y ago
there is no conflict. money is not the only benefit others can get from your work. if you run a soup kitchen it will certainly benefit people even if it doesn't make money. for me the whole purpose of life is to make a positive contribution to society. that can take many forms
- astrange 4y ago
  The conflict is between “the world is just trying to rip you off” and “you should work to benefit society”.
  - em-bee 4y ago
    The World Only Cares About What It Can Get from You is not the same thing as the world is just trying to rip you off
  - __B_B__ 4y ago
    You're assuming "the world" and "society" to be harmonious concepts but in the worldview of the author they're not, and therefore, for him, there is no contradiction. You will see it in the way he describes working together to meet basic needs at the end of point 6. He says society is a system for meeting needs. The world presents a set of problems and society presents a set of solutions through it's behavioral demands. The rest of the article is just him rationalizing the demands and the repercussions of not meeting them but the underlying assertions he is making are these: That humans are not a part of the world. They are just in it and afflicted by the requirements of being there. That society is a social technology which partitions us off and functions to preserve us therein. Therefore any demands it makes or repercussions it inflicts are legitimate and bound up with your survival and that the sooner you get on board, the sooner you will be "a better person". Another dead give away is the fact that "better" is a completely subjective evaluation, but he kind of buries the lede on that one and goes on to talk about "society" in the singular, probably knowing full well that the reader will just project their own subjective definition.

raldi 4y ago

> Everyone who watched that video instantly became a little happier Anyone remember what the video was back when it used to work?

nnoitra 4y ago

" Because the girl in the bookstore that you've been daydreaming about moisturizes her face for an hour every night and feels guilty when she eats anything other than salad for lunch. She's going to be a surgeon in 10 years. What do you do? " Oh yeah, every cute girl is going to come up with AGI or become a surgeon it's only the guys that are worthless and bringing nothing to the table. The girl in the bookstore loves handsome men and she barely cares about his GPA. This idea that women see right through you needs to die. It's mostly about looks.

aliswe 4y ago
He is strawmanning someone in the article, quoting them, but doesn't seem that far away from your position: "Who is THIS guy to tell ME how to live? Oh, like he's so high and mighty! It's just some dumb writer on the Internet! I'm going to go dig up something on him that reassures me that he's stupid, and that everything he's saying is stupid! This guy is so pretentious, it makes me puke!"
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
human_person 4y ago
“moisturizes her face for an hour every night and feels guilty when she eats anything other than salad for lunch” He’s also saying that good looks/being cute take effort.