6 ms·

> Every action you take isn’t a vote for the type of person you wish to become, it is a vote taken by the person you are. This is patently false. If you start

> Every action you take isn’t a vote for the type of person you wish to become, it is a vote taken by the person you are. This is patently false. If you start smoking cigarettes occasionally and start doing it more, you are becoming more of a smoker. The actions you take or don't take are the clearest input to the person you become. It's true that this is also the person you are, but that distinction seems meaningless if you're trying to become someone better (whatever better means to you). On a more general note (and this is what you are saying), you can both prioritize the things you need to do to progress and the time you need for enjoying yourself and your current life. These things are only mutually exclusive if you're pushing past your personal limits and there's a lot of inputs to that equation and whether that's worth it to each individual. So my next question is: why such a strong aversion to people improving themselves? There is no problem with being competitive. However competitive you want to be, be. Do it for yourself. Don't know the author of the post, but people who are hyper competitive usually aren't telling others to also be hyper competitive (unless it's a Gary V or someone similar). From my experience, they're usually just doing their own thing.

cpursley 4y ago
> why such a strong aversion to people improving themselves crab bucket mentality
- rukuu001 4y ago
  In case people aren’t familiar with crab bucket mentality (I wasn’t) - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality
- Apocryphon 4y ago
  These trends shift back and forth. A few years ago, certainly a decade ago, everyone was into productivity porn and life hacks and optimizing one's lives. Right now people are just generally burned out after the last couple of years.
mistermann 4y ago
> There is no problem with being competitive. What if this is not true without exception? > From my experience, they're usually just doing their own thing. The "just" seems off - actions can affect the state of the system we all live in, and sometimes these effects are negative.
mikkergp 4y ago
If the only reason a person is having a conversation with me is so they can be a better conversationalist tomorrow, than they can fuck off. I worked out today, I ate healthy today, I worked hard and did chores for my family, and praticed my art forms and I did it all for today. Who knows what tomorrow will bring. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with planning for tomorrow, but there is a problem with seeing "every action you take" that way. Why do you sense this as a strong aversion to people improving themselves, and not a strong aversion to people trying to guilt people into seeing only one mindset to self improvement?
- vhiremath4 4y ago
  I strongly agree with this. I think you really have to begin to love the journey if you want to improve at something with slow incremental gains over time. But everyone has to start somewhere, and, honestly speaking, most people don't want to work out. Most people don't want to work hard. Or eat healthy. You have to force yourself initially to see that this is going to lead to you loving to do these things you currently hate.
- 1659447091 4y ago
  I believe it's more along the lines of "I'm having a conversation with you today because I value and care about you and our friendship etc; I want to be the kind of person that shows up for others and leaves people I interact with in a better place/mood/etc." Instead of being the person not aware of their moods and carrying resentment over the smallest slights so they end up bitching about it to everyone. If one never chooses, or "vote", for the positive/uplifting inter/action, then they are "voting" to keep being the person who always has something to complain about. Similarly, the smoking example, choose to be someone who cares about their health or the person who could not care less. Better is defined by the user. But either way, it will certainly build, or describe, the type of person they are choosing or "voting" to be. Though, its really just stating the obvious. The more you do or don't something the more those actions become you. The "votes" on those actions don't have to be overt. It's like they were trying to find a novel way to restate the self-help quote: "Watch your thoughts, they become your words; watch your words, they become your actions; watch your actions, they become your habits; watch your habits, they become your character; watch your character, it becomes your destiny." (-attributed to the usual suspects)
notyourwork 4y ago
> The actions you take or don't take are the clearest input to the person you become. They are the clearest input to the person you *are*. I agree with the OP you replied to.
P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
One wonders if you created this post to be come a better typist.
wizofaus 4y ago
> There is no problem with being competitive. I'd say there definitely is if you do everything in life that way. You seem to be assuming it's possible to be meaningful competitive without it affecting how you interact with other people. But competitive-minded people often make it abundantly clear to those around them how much they're "winning" and even make it a point of pride that others aren't doing so well. So yes, there definitely can be problems with being competitive. But our competitive instinct can be positive motivating force - we've all pushed ourselves that little harder knowing the reward will be a higher spot on the results table. How to combine that with not being an asshole about it seems to be the challenge.
- darkerside 4y ago
  Salience bias. You don't notice the competitive people who aren't assholes, but there are plenty of them. Some of them are even humble.
karaterobot 4y ago
> This is patently false. If you start smoking cigarettes occasionally and start doing it more, you are becoming more of a smoker. The actions you take or don't take are the clearest input to the person you become. It's true that this is also the person you are, but that distinction seems meaningless if you're trying to become someone better (whatever better means to you). I don't know about 'patently false': it's literally true. The things you do reflect who you are when you do them, the person you are becoming is a hypothetical who does not exist. For example, I am the one splitting hairs in this comment, not the future me who wants to be named world's biggest pedant. What your example points out is someone who is doing more of something over time. A smoker who smokes more is a trend, not an action.
- stonemetal12 4y ago
  It is a false dichotomy. Every action you take today is a vote by the you who exists right now. Every action you take today does build the history of the person you are tomorrow. It is not one or the other, but both.
  - karaterobot 4y ago
    Describing any action as a vote about your future identity is a way of thinking about the world. It makes sense within the particular framework this article is presenting, but it is not a universally held belief, and it's not self-evidently true. It's a metaphor. Here's an example: if you choose not a rob a bank 10,000 times, that's 10,000 votes for not being a bank robber. Then if you choose to rob a bank just one time, you're suddenly a bank robber. 10,000 to 1, the number of votes doesn't actually matter. That's a silly example, but what it means is that your identity isn't always the result of a bunch of small decisions. Often there's just one "vote", and that is the decision you make, the action you take. One objection to this may be "but being a bank robber isn't who you are, it's just something you did." If so, I wonder how to square that with the example of becoming more of a smoker by smoking more cigarettes? Can I vote not to be a smoker, even if I smoke a lot of cigarettes? Or to be less of a smoker by smoking more cigarettes? That doesn't make sense to me. Anyway, hope this clarifies my objection: "actions are votes about who you will become" is a metaphorical explanation, not a literal one, so that comment way upthread is not patently false in my opinion, even if it's arguable.
s1artibartfast 4y ago
>It's true that this is also the person you are, but that distinction seems meaningless if you're trying to become someone better (whatever better means to you) Do, or do not. There is no try. This is a meaningful distinction, even if it is a nuanced one. There's a profound difference between focusing on who you want to be tomorrow versus who you want to be today. One mindset takes you out of the present and is an act of self denial. The other embraces the present and affirms positive self identity.
- stjohnswarts 4y ago
  Another mindset that gets overused is "always live in the now" . Sometimes you have to stop and assess what direction you're heading with in life...
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    It's sad that the idea of living in the now has been co-oped to mean acting impulsively and stupidity. Being present has better connotations. Sometimes being present means stopping and assessing your life. It means engaging with your life in more holistic manner. It can mean planning, reflection, and listening to yourself. I feel like many people code switch between being recklessly impulsive and intellectually abstract, while never actually living in the now. These two avoidant behaviors are at the root most people's miseries. You shouldn't have to fight yourself to do what is best for your future, or suppress your intellect to enjoy the present.
yodsanklai 4y ago
> why such a strong aversion to people improving themselves? It's fine to be competitive or trying to improve. But it seems to me that people reading this type of self-improvement articles are wasting their time (ironic if they want to be more productive).
yibg 4y ago
Is it? If you saw me smoking would you say "you are a smoker" or "you will become a smoker"?

cpursley 4y ago

> why such a strong aversion to people improving themselves crab bucket mentality

rukuu001 4y ago
In case people aren’t familiar with crab bucket mentality (I wasn’t) - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality
Apocryphon 4y ago
These trends shift back and forth. A few years ago, certainly a decade ago, everyone was into productivity porn and life hacks and optimizing one's lives. Right now people are just generally burned out after the last couple of years.

mistermann 4y ago

> There is no problem with being competitive. What if this is not true without exception? > From my experience, they're usually just doing their own thing. The "just" seems off - actions can affect the state of the system we all live in, and sometimes these effects are negative.

mikkergp 4y ago

If the only reason a person is having a conversation with me is so they can be a better conversationalist tomorrow, than they can fuck off. I worked out today, I ate healthy today, I worked hard and did chores for my family, and praticed my art forms and I did it all for today. Who knows what tomorrow will bring. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with planning for tomorrow, but there is a problem with seeing "every action you take" that way. Why do you sense this as a strong aversion to people improving themselves, and not a strong aversion to people trying to guilt people into seeing only one mindset to self improvement?

vhiremath4 4y ago
I strongly agree with this. I think you really have to begin to love the journey if you want to improve at something with slow incremental gains over time. But everyone has to start somewhere, and, honestly speaking, most people don't want to work out. Most people don't want to work hard. Or eat healthy. You have to force yourself initially to see that this is going to lead to you loving to do these things you currently hate.
1659447091 4y ago
I believe it's more along the lines of "I'm having a conversation with you today because I value and care about you and our friendship etc; I want to be the kind of person that shows up for others and leaves people I interact with in a better place/mood/etc." Instead of being the person not aware of their moods and carrying resentment over the smallest slights so they end up bitching about it to everyone. If one never chooses, or "vote", for the positive/uplifting inter/action, then they are "voting" to keep being the person who always has something to complain about. Similarly, the smoking example, choose to be someone who cares about their health or the person who could not care less. Better is defined by the user. But either way, it will certainly build, or describe, the type of person they are choosing or "voting" to be. Though, its really just stating the obvious. The more you do or don't something the more those actions become you. The "votes" on those actions don't have to be overt. It's like they were trying to find a novel way to restate the self-help quote: "Watch your thoughts, they become your words; watch your words, they become your actions; watch your actions, they become your habits; watch your habits, they become your character; watch your character, it becomes your destiny." (-attributed to the usual suspects)

notyourwork 4y ago

> The actions you take or don't take are the clearest input to the person you become. They are the clearest input to the person you *are*. I agree with the OP you replied to.

P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago

One wonders if you created this post to be come a better typist.

wizofaus 4y ago

> There is no problem with being competitive. I'd say there definitely is if you do everything in life that way. You seem to be assuming it's possible to be meaningful competitive without it affecting how you interact with other people. But competitive-minded people often make it abundantly clear to those around them how much they're "winning" and even make it a point of pride that others aren't doing so well. So yes, there definitely can be problems with being competitive. But our competitive instinct can be positive motivating force - we've all pushed ourselves that little harder knowing the reward will be a higher spot on the results table. How to combine that with not being an asshole about it seems to be the challenge.

darkerside 4y ago
Salience bias. You don't notice the competitive people who aren't assholes, but there are plenty of them. Some of them are even humble.

karaterobot 4y ago

> This is patently false. If you start smoking cigarettes occasionally and start doing it more, you are becoming more of a smoker. The actions you take or don't take are the clearest input to the person you become. It's true that this is also the person you are, but that distinction seems meaningless if you're trying to become someone better (whatever better means to you). I don't know about 'patently false': it's literally true. The things you do reflect who you are when you do them, the person you are becoming is a hypothetical who does not exist. For example, I am the one splitting hairs in this comment, not the future me who wants to be named world's biggest pedant. What your example points out is someone who is doing more of something over time. A smoker who smokes more is a trend, not an action.

stonemetal12 4y ago
It is a false dichotomy. Every action you take today is a vote by the you who exists right now. Every action you take today does build the history of the person you are tomorrow. It is not one or the other, but both.
- karaterobot 4y ago
  Describing any action as a vote about your future identity is a way of thinking about the world. It makes sense within the particular framework this article is presenting, but it is not a universally held belief, and it's not self-evidently true. It's a metaphor. Here's an example: if you choose not a rob a bank 10,000 times, that's 10,000 votes for not being a bank robber. Then if you choose to rob a bank just one time, you're suddenly a bank robber. 10,000 to 1, the number of votes doesn't actually matter. That's a silly example, but what it means is that your identity isn't always the result of a bunch of small decisions. Often there's just one "vote", and that is the decision you make, the action you take. One objection to this may be "but being a bank robber isn't who you are, it's just something you did." If so, I wonder how to square that with the example of becoming more of a smoker by smoking more cigarettes? Can I vote not to be a smoker, even if I smoke a lot of cigarettes? Or to be less of a smoker by smoking more cigarettes? That doesn't make sense to me. Anyway, hope this clarifies my objection: "actions are votes about who you will become" is a metaphorical explanation, not a literal one, so that comment way upthread is not patently false in my opinion, even if it's arguable.

s1artibartfast 4y ago

>It's true that this is also the person you are, but that distinction seems meaningless if you're trying to become someone better (whatever better means to you) Do, or do not. There is no try. This is a meaningful distinction, even if it is a nuanced one. There's a profound difference between focusing on who you want to be tomorrow versus who you want to be today. One mindset takes you out of the present and is an act of self denial. The other embraces the present and affirms positive self identity.

stjohnswarts 4y ago
Another mindset that gets overused is "always live in the now" . Sometimes you have to stop and assess what direction you're heading with in life...
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  It's sad that the idea of living in the now has been co-oped to mean acting impulsively and stupidity. Being present has better connotations. Sometimes being present means stopping and assessing your life. It means engaging with your life in more holistic manner. It can mean planning, reflection, and listening to yourself. I feel like many people code switch between being recklessly impulsive and intellectually abstract, while never actually living in the now. These two avoidant behaviors are at the root most people's miseries. You shouldn't have to fight yourself to do what is best for your future, or suppress your intellect to enjoy the present.

yodsanklai 4y ago

> why such a strong aversion to people improving themselves? It's fine to be competitive or trying to improve. But it seems to me that people reading this type of self-improvement articles are wasting their time (ironic if they want to be more productive).

yibg 4y ago

Is it? If you saw me smoking would you say "you are a smoker" or "you will become a smoker"?