>What is important in the emotional landscape of competency is not necessarily having an accurate model, but feeling good about the model you have Honestly I'm

>What is important in the emotional landscape of competency is not necessarily having an accurate model, but feeling good about the model you have Honestly I'm not sure how emotions enter into competency. Competency is best understood as the ability to get things done. You have some goals and when you are able to achieve them with reasonable efficacy you're competent. If you don't then you're not. (unless someone else is legitimately to blame, which I would not make a habit unless it's very obvious) Rather than spending a lot of time with emotional introspection about ones own competence, imposter syndrome theorizing and what have you just evaluate your competency on measurable, real world tasks. When you don't meet them just accept that you may not be that competent, nobody's died over that fact. Also ties into the last part. advocating "don't be attached to outcomes" is a bad idea because pursuing a tautological path that doesn't even have a theoretical failure mode is, to use a good neologism, copium. Failure and incompetence are okay, they're pretty much the natural state of things in most situations. Being overly emotional about it isn't that helpful, just do something about it.