10 ms·
Pursuing status will never bring true happiness
- maximilianroos 4y agoInstead of denying your desire for status, surround yourself with people who will award you status for doing the things you want to accomplish. We have a whole mechanism in our brain dedicated to chasing status — harness it!
- hydrok9 4y agoReal happiness is realizing that having fun is the only thing that will keep you going in life.
- yamrzou 4y agoThis is a great read, thanks for sharing!
- sys_64738 4y agoMy inner ring trap is retirement. I can’t wait to get there.
- dgacmu 4y agoI wonder if the inner ring trap for retirement is "well, maybe I should wait until I have another $AMOUNT invested just to (be sure, be able to do more, etc.)."
- loandbehold 4y agoYes, many working people can retire right now if they reduce their expectraions.
- jjtheblunt 4y agoUntil you go golfing one time, and are like omg wtf how do people retire, because I’m bored? I say that because that’s what many i know have realized once they (we) didn’t have to work. I suspect the personality of engineering types likes puzzle solving, and is inclined to find some class of puzzles to “work” on.
- nonethewiser 4y agoGolf is such a good example of a game you can always improve at. There are a million things to tweak and you can play it practically your whole life. Retiring also doesn’t mean you can’t program.
- sys_64738 4y agoI only work because I can't retire. I'd rather be bored silly than to work as I work to live, not the other way around.
- deathanatos 4y ago… yeah. There are so many creative pursuits I'd like to try. But after a long week of work, by the time I have recovered sufficient energy to think about it … it's 11:59pm on Sunday. Boredom sounds like a nice "problem" to have.
- gryn 4y agoI guess this is the kind of problem where different people have a different meaning for the term 'retirement'. for some it means having a source of income that isn't tied to working so that they can do anything including 'working' on things they like without worry of it being a money generating activity. for others retiring means stopping to work in the broadest possible meaning of the term.
- rgmerk 4y agoSure. But if you’ve got enough money to not have to work, you can choose to solve whatever puzzles you want. The best position in academia is “emeritus professor”.
- 4y ago
- sp527 4y agoThat sounds like a really unfortunate way to go through life. Maybe you should reflect on possible alternatives?
- sys_64738 4y agoWhy? I'm outta here as quickly as I can afford to. Life is too short to spend it working.
- toomuchtodo 4y agohttps://twitter.com/naval/status/1002103497725173760 https://twitter.com/naval/status/1002103497725173760 > Seek wealth, not money or status. Wealth is having assets that earn while you sleep. Money is how we transfer time and wealth. Status is your place in the social hierarchy. https://twitter.com/naval/status/1002103627387813888 https://twitter.com/naval/status/1002103627387813888 > Ignore people playing status games. They gain status by attacking people playing wealth creation games. From @naval’s Twitter thread “how to get rich (without getting lucky)” https://twitter.com/naval/status/1002103360646823936 https://twitter.com/naval/status/1002103360646823936 My note: wealth is options; options are freedom, and buying your time back. Only play status games if you’re playing for fun, but don’t confuse it with success and freedom.
- nonethewiser 4y agoOptions, huh? Got it. Puts on Google here we go.
- moneywoes 4y agoWell who knew it was that easy
- puppymaster 4y agoYep. As a HF mentor used to tell me - Wealth buys optionality. Variance is the outcome.
- maxbond 4y agoI agree wealth buys optionality, but regarding variance wouldn't that imply wealthy people have better and worse outcomes than nonwealthy people, who would have consistently middling outcomes? That doesn't really match my observations.
- inconceivable 4y agowealthy people don't talk about the massive losses, only their massive gains.
- tsunamifury 4y agoI think rejecting status wholesale is also a huge mistake. Here’s the harsh reality. Many people judge and make decisions based on status. You can purport be above it and bootstrap and work as hard as you want but that one guy with status will get the raise he needed and now you don’t have. You can then try to lie to yourself that that is just superficial status. But it’s not. That guy can now use those resources to get ahead and you can’t. Bootstrapping can become a toxic independence mentality that focuses on lying to yourself on how self sufficient you are — all while you are going nowhere fast. Reality is harsh and doesn’t go by pat philosophies. Also go ask a low status person in society how much status “doesn’t matter” and you’re gonna get some very real answers. Mostly I find people who already have high status are the ones that rant about how it doesn’t matter.
- nonethewiser 4y agoIt seems obvious to me that focusing on doing the right thing is good, while focusing more on managing everyone else’s impression of you is bad. In fact I thought everyone knew this.
- ethanbond 4y agoGotta do both if you want to retain the right to do the correct things in the future.
- prawn 4y agoIf you're generally doing good things, you don't need to spend anywhere near as much time managing your public reputation. Obviously you can choose to, but it'd be by choice and not out of desperate attempts to glorify meagre deeds or cover-up bad ones.
- tsunamifury 4y agoA lot of really bad people didn’t care at all what anyone else thought of them. Status, like it or not, is a huge determining factor in opportunities. You can do the right thing all you want but if people think nothing of you, you might not get very far. This is coming from someone who doggedly believes in doing the right thing and lost status many times for doing what I thought was right. It doesn’t always work out.
- davnicwil 4y agoWhen you look at individuals who have achieved things you admire, it's so often true that they themselves came from outside the status system that existed at that time. They now sit within, or atop the current one, but it's often something they themselves have created to a greater or lesser degree. There's a huge lesson there, I think. Being in that position in the current status system is not and never was their goal. It came as a consequence of acheiving real goals, real success. It was a reality they created. If you want to emulate them, you won't do it by 'getting in' to that current system, that's for sure. Instead focus on doing your own thing, and maybe one day finding yourself within or atop a new one.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoPlease show me a new status system. Not just different people on top of an already existing one. I could see brand new status systems existing for, say, a new video game. Everyone starts out equally as newbies and works their way up. Maybe someone could leverage their position in a current status system (such as wealth or free time) to boost their potential in this new system. Brand new industries could create new status systems, though I don't know how often they really do (for instance, the female programmers of the early computer era tended to bring their lower status into the system, not get status from the new system). I suffer from the problem of not paying attention to status. Which kind of puts me on the outskirts of any status system, or at the very least not able to recognize my status within current systems.
- davnicwil 4y agoYC
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoThat's a club within the venture capital status system, right?
- davnicwil 4y ago
- d357r0y3r 4y agoI think status is our main currency as human beings. All that really matters is what others think of us. The main thing you have to figure out is _which_ status hierarchy you want to compete in, not _if_ you want to compete in a status hierarchy. Even people who claim not to care about what people think, actually do care what _some_ people think.
- tsunamifury 4y agoFor example bootstrappers or FIRE people seem to care more about status than anyone I’ve met but inside their own smaller communities status games.
- Rastonbury 4y agoI rather have money and security, status is a means to that end, because sometimes there are gatekeepers or people who can help you but will write you off if they think you are not a peer or in group I always am reminded of billionaire heirs, who shirk status games and give false last names to be treated as a normal person instead of a valuable business contact or such
- labster 4y agoThis was interesting to me because the status-seeking behavior is so alien to me. Why people would want to belong to group after exclusive group is beyond me. They’re all granfaloons, anyway. A few good friends is enough, and status is only useful as a means to an end. I’m always prepared to burn status (as political capital) to achieve a greater good. But it’s still interesting to think about those who chase status, and what their lives must be like.
- paulpauper 4y agoSounds like the hedonic treadmill...it means you can never get enough. you will always want more.
- heybrendan 4y agohttps://archive.ph/qIted https://archive.ph/qIted
- throwmeaway1212 4y agothis seems to just link to the 'about page'
- heybrendan 4y agoThanks, updated the link.
- wallflower 4y agoAnyone who is interested in status, I recommend “Impro: Improvisation and The Theatre” by Keith Johnstone. The tldr is in almost every social situation there are “status” games. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/306940.Impro https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/306940.Impro https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20436197 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20436197
- gnicholas 4y ago> I experienced this myself when running my first company. We had been bootstrapping for a year when a competitor entered the space and raised $10 million. This brought up a lot of insecurity....Comparing myself to them, I felt like an outsider—like we were missing something or approaching the business wrong. I can see how status would be at play here, but if I were a founder whose market had just been crashed by a competitor that raised a ton more money, I'd mostly be worried. Even if I thought I was smart for taking a bootstrapped approach, I'd be concerned that having a well-funded competitor would make life much harder.
- hodgesrm 4y ago> I'd be concerned that having a well-funded competitor would make life much harder. That's certainly true for things that you can buy with a lot of money, such as marketing. On the other hand, having such a competitor forces you to think really hard about how to help customers and what makes your company different.
- gnicholas 4y agoYes, and having a competitor can also help draw attention to a sector. But I would say my primary feeling about the situation would not involve status. It would involve increased competition and strategic disadvantages.
- hodgesrm 4y agoNo argument there. My goal is to maximize interests of customers, employees, investors, and my own family. That's enough without worrying about somebody else's notions of status. As Jane Austen's Elizabeth Bennett said to Lady de Bourgh, "I am only resolved to act in that manner, which will, in my own opinion, constitute my happiness, without reference to you, or to any person so wholly unconnected with me." [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_and_Prejudice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_and_Prejudice
- julianeon 4y agoI think there was a historical change that has complicated our conversation about status. In the 50's, the peak of this, it seemed like many people got a 'deal' that went something like this: you & your work colleagues could afford a house, car, and the costs associated with several children, starting in your 20's. All of those things at a pretty high level actually (ie not a terrible unsafe house, not a broken down jalopy, etc.) In fact, only one of you in a marriage would have to work: one salary was enough. In that situation - and this is where a lot of these attitudes to status first evolved - high status can be treated as a "who cares?" thing. You and the 1950's CEO making 5x as much as you do both have a few well fed & healthy kids, right? In a hand-wavey sense you can say you're 'the same.' Well, times have changed. Now the fight is a lot more desperate. Higher status can be the difference between affording a house, or not; having kids, or not. The ability to live a middle class life is much more on the line. So while in the 50's, the advantages to being more high status seemed almost cosmetic, today, they're anything but.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Clubber 4y ago>So while in the 50's, the advantages to being more high status seemed almost cosmetic, today, they're anything but. I disagree. There's plenty of people who are secure in their finances that you would never know about just by looking at them or hearing their name. Status is for the ego, security is way more important. You can go for status after you've achieved financial security if you so desire. The only status you need is when someone asks someone you worked with if you are good at your vocation, they say yes. If you are honest, they say yes. If you are a good person, they say yes.
- robotresearcher 4y ago> So while in the 50's, the advantages to being more high status seemed almost cosmetic Is this the same Fifties with white and colored water fountains, and where women had to leave office jobs when they married?
- 4y ago
- unrealp 4y agoone of the hacks i always suggest for social anxiety is fixing status to a middle or lower value. socially anxious people, are always assessing their status and that puts lot of stress, in addition to anxiety. assuming a fixed but middle or lower status gives some stability and reduces the stress part. it at least frees part of your brain and you can focus on what is going on around you.
- tqi 4y agoOn the one hand, sure, status probably is a trap and won't bring "true happiness." And I think this is well meaning advice. But on the other hand, I think it's possible that an Ivy League educated founder/VC partner/executive coach might not be in the best position to see the whole picture. To paraphrase the Aviator[1], you don't care about status because you've always had it. I think that for many people who have experienced precarity, rather than being driven by vanity, this pursuit of status is a rational way to increase security. [1] https://youtu.be/br-ljup5Bow https://youtu.be/br-ljup5Bow
- Clubber 4y ago>I think that pursuit of status is a rational way to increase security. I agree, I would recommend increasing security as the priority, not status. Status doesn't pay the bills necessarily when the recessions hit, security does. If you can get security without status, that's better than status without security.
- tqi 4y agoAgree, and the best security is obviously money. But to me, status means warm intros for new business opportunities, or that your resume will reliably get past the recruiter screening stage. Stuff that can help you maintain or rebuild security.
- apsurd 4y agobest security is not obviously money. i wouldnt know of course, but there's a good scene that covers this in the first(ish) season of House of Cards: Kevin Spaceys character laments about otherwise excellent talent shortsightedly chasing the $$$ of the private sector jobs rather than strategically climbing the ladder of Capital Hill. All this to say, his point is broadly that influence and power can always find a way to money, money doesn't necessarily flow the other way through, not in every situation etc.
- throwawaysleep 4y ago
- arthurofbabylon 4y agoStatus is an intermediary step between behavior and true goals. In some cases status might be an effective part of the path in actualizing the real goal (for example, community organizing). In many cases status distracts and becomes a goal of its own, much like money and pleasure tend to do in our lives. As a personal exercise I find it useful to trace my behavior to end goals (and back the other way), and then disregard false goals/traps while problem solving other obstacles. I suspect the common real goal on the other side of status from one’s behavior is to be loved. All humans share this goal with widely varying strategies, and some of those strategies expose the individual to the status trap. The most effective means to overcome this trap is to accomplish the real goal, and in the case of being loved one convenient solution is to appreciate the people in our lives, from acquaintances to close family. From appreciation comes kindness and openness, and from there we experience love and feelings of belonging. Status then becomes either irrelevant, or a tool one can now effectively wield.
- iamnotsure 4y agoStatus is like a state in programming. If you have no status, you're not autonomous. Too much status is not elegant. Therapy is like a sport, not necessarily healthy.
- davidw 4y agoStatus seems like a 'zero sum game'. For me to win, you have to lose. There are a lot of other things where everyone can come out better off, but status is all relative. Kind of like sports, where maybe both teams play really well, but only one is going to win. But at least that's just entertainment at the end of the day.
- atleastoptimal 4y agoThat's the problem I've always had with competitive, hierarchy based value systems. If we value status relative to other humans as a positive good that must be achieved, then no amount of technological, social, or any kind of progress could ever make things better overall. To reward relative superiority insists that the joy of the few requires the misery of many. Anyone who longs for this kind of structure is one who doesn't care for the betterment of any society or humanity as a whole, but rather relishes the superiority of the successful minority of those who found themselves one day at the top of the pyramid. Every time we applaud some student who got accepted into Harvard, we are implicitly degrading the quality of all schools below it. Even if we lived in an ideal world where every school were equivalent to Harvard, we would cease to care about admittance to any of them except for the one deemed "the best". I've read stories about people having "glow ups" and realizing they really were attractive all along, an inspiring tale that requires this lucky individual be placed above every unfortunate ugly person who didn't miraculously grow into their features. The point being that the ostensible value of this kind of story, whenever I read it, seems to be not that the individual "made it" by merit of becoming more attractive than their past self, but rather their success is only valid if they become attractive relative to others. This kind of thinking is pervasive, yet thematically addictive. The climb above others seems to be self-evidently desirable.
- cyberge99 4y agoThe site won’t let me subscribe.
- bezier-curve 4y agoIt's worth pursuing status if the status you had was taken away unfairly via defamation.
- raincom 4y agoOne can't talk in terms of true or untrue happiness. People seek status to access happiness. What happens all the time is this: after you achieve such a status, you lose access to happiness. Now you will seek other things to access happiness. Rinse and repeat.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- mpweiher 4y ago> when our status is challenged, our body reacts like it's in physical danger While it's not 100% certain, the fact that there appears to be a biological adaptation that makes us seek status and avoid losing status strongly suggests that the author is underestimating the importance of status in human society. For example: "we find that status is significantly associated with men’s reproductive success, consistent with an evolved basis for status pursuit." https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1606800113 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1606800113
- mirror_neuron 4y agoThat adaptation may not be appropriate for the modern environment. When exposed to modern/ internet-scale communities, it could be that there are so many false-positive threats to one’s status that the advice to (generally) not worry too much about it is good advice. Our innate desire for sweets comes to mind.
- mpweiher 4y agoSure, key word being may. However, the author just assumes that is maladaptive, and that's a big and largely unwarranted assumption to make, particularly considering the presence of a biological adaptation. (I also didn't see internet communities as the main focus of the article, it seemed about status in general and in all contexts) Also, just because something is maladaptive in some ways or some parts of the environment does not mean it is maladaptive overall. Nature makes compromises in her creature all the time, she has to! For an extreme example, look up female Hyenas... https://africageographic.com/stories/good-bad-gory-birth-hyena-cub/ https://africageographic.com/stories/good-bad-gory-birth-hye...
- nathias 4y agoit could be like with money, there is a small, normal threshold after which the returns are decreasing, but I think status probably scales better than money
- glass3 4y agoThe article feels very coherent to the point that I want to follow its advice. But will it work? >Status, like money and power, is a form of capital. If we can learn to tolerate our feelings of “not-enoughness,” we can then use status in service of what we care about, rather than being addicted to it as an end in itself. If we can tolerate 'not-enoughness', what would be there that needs change? As a society, don't we have to tolerate addiction because that's the loop that drives our progress? >Casey Rosengren is a founder and executive coach based in New York. If you’d like to learn more about ACT and values-oriented coaching, drop him a note. 'founder' - Does he use the title 'in service' or is he still trapped in the status game? In the latter case, is his advice still valid?
- triihart 4y ago[flagged]
- 127 4y agoJust like chasing money will never bring true happiness, but the lack of money will definitely bring true misery.
- antman 4y agoPursuing external validation in whichever form will never bring true happiness. Things that might have been important a thousand years ago and will probably be important to people a thousand years in the future probably translate to happiness People and marketing mix happiness with joyfulness, which fades into emptiness thus requiring increasingly stronger stimulants. One test of happiness might be sitting on the grass looking at e.g. the trees or the sea for one hour. If you can't, you are stressed. If you can for ten hours you are depressed.
- kukkeliskuu 4y agoThis question has been central to me for a long time. Reading Impro by Johnstone and Inner Ring by C.S. Lewis yourself is central to understanding this topic. First thing to understand is that status follows power law dynamic, instead of being normally distributed. Thus, in social status games, there is typically winner-take-all mentality. The bigger the game, the more the distribution is skewed. You can easily understand why, if you think about blogs. The first blogs have a huge advantage. Everybody wants to link from the popular ones, so they befriend the people maintaining those blogs. So if you are already popular, people will want to connect to you, so you will get even more popular, as more people join the community. It is easier to talk about this in the context of social dancing, because the feedback on your status is more immediate and visible. If you have high social status, you are sought after as dance partner by the opposite sex. If you have less than high social status you are either not sought after, or even avoided as dance partner. Interesting thing is that your social status is dynamic, it depends on status of others. For example, in some dance parties I may be one of the high status males. In other dance parties I can be some of the medium status males. Sometimes I may even be a low status male. If I don't know anybody in a place, then women might be less than willing to take a risk and dance with me. If I cannot easily find a partner, and I am left without a partner, women start thinking there is something wrong with me, and start actively avoiding me. So there is negative status spiral as well. The thing to understand here is that nothing in my skill has changed. Only the environment has changed. People are highly influenced by the environment. People use the interest of others (i.e. status) as a heuristic to gauge whther they should be interested in somebody (i.e. grant them status). However, the inner truth here is that ultimately none of this really matters. I am not kinesthetically gifted, my dancing is not visually very attractive, so I cannot get high status by showing off. My strength is that I appear to be a little bit more emotionally open so that something I call "emotional connection" in the dance happens more often and is deeper. The dancers who are emotionally more open in this sense is actually the circle of "sound craftsmen" which C.S. Lewis talks about. And they recognize each other, regardless of social status. And "emotional connection" is something that really brings happiness in the dance.
- philip142au 4y agoX will never bring true happiness. So much nonsense
- philip142au 4y agoStatus and money is essential, people with high status make good money, and you need it just to get to retirement, money that is. I do not like X good think will not bring happiness, its a pattern of X where X = working hard, money, status, etc does not bring happiness. Its dangerous and bad to teach people to be anything other than selfish in a constructive way.
- derbOac 4y agoI share your skepticism to some extent, but where I think I also think the perspective of the post has some merit is in recognizing that those things you equate with X are not all the same, and not interchangeable. In my experience, you can work hard, be smart, work smart, and that still doesn't necessarily equate into money or status. This is more true the more that the system you're operating in is broken or corrupt. At some point you question what it is you're doing, and what the payoffs are or whether or not they're worth it. Maybe getting to retirement financially is better done through a different circle with different status markers. The thing about status is it's inherently heterogeneous. Although there are ideas of status that are more or less prevalent, everyone has a different idea of what status means at some level. I can think of very concrete, real examples that are objectively very high status under very reasonable definitions, but to me come across as gauche, immoral, and unintelligent.
- dotsam 4y agoMost things are tied up with status games, even if they don't look like it at first glance. Nietzsche gives the example of the self-renouncer, who might seem to go beyond status games by renouncing material things. But this renunciation of one status game is just replaced by another. It's the same desire for status, but aimed at a different object. The self-renouncer's object is the status of being seen as the exalted person who soars above everyone else, free from vulgar worldly desires. > What does the self-renouncer do? He strives after a higher world, he wants to fly longer and further and higher than all men of affirmation—he throws away many things that would burden his flight, and several things among them that are not valueless, that are not unpleasant to him: he sacrifices them to his desire for elevation. Now this sacrificing, this casting away, is the very thing which becomes visible in him: on that account one calls him the self-renouncer, and as such he stands before us, enveloped in his cowl, and as the soul of a hair-shirt. With this effect, however, which he makes upon us he is well content: he wants to keep concealed from us his desire, his pride, his intention of flying above us.—Yes! He is wiser than we thought, and so courteous towards us—this affirmer! For that is what he is, like us, even in his self-renunciation I can recommend the book The Status Game by Will Storr if you want to read more about status.
- joenot443 4y agoThe Gospel teaches a similar idea with the notion of charity. Matthew 6:3 “But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth” It helps if you’re familiar with the analysis, but I think the idea translates. The teaching being that if you’re going to be charitable, you shouldn’t do it as a means to advance your status. The people who give simply for recognition aren’t being charitable at all, they’re seeking status in the same way everyone else does.
- dotsam 4y agoIsn't 'giving according to the teachings of the Gospel' achieving another kind of status (in your own heart, in the eyes of God)?
- throwaway22032 4y agoWell, there's a minimum acceptable bound for status. Not only in a social hierarchy, literally "status" in the sense of lifestyle and being. A house, a car, a family. Most people want that. If they don't have that, they will almost certainly be unhappy. If they do have it, they may still be unhappy, but for different reasons. The perversion is that somehow having basic 20th century necessities such as a house and a family is now seen as some sort of privilege. If you believe that, you've been brainwashed. Strictly, yes, it doesn't flow from the stars, someone has to build and produce the structure, but ideas that people should simply be okay sharing accommodation / living in micro flats / eating bugs / foregoing children to 'save the planet' etc are simply misguided in a world in which a huge number of people (not some microscopic elite, but like, half of the UK, US, etc) have more than that and treat more than that as being a basic standard.
- Aeolun 4y agoMore status is not a guarantee of happiness in the same way that more money isn’t. It just helps you not have to worry about a lot of things that other people do have to worry about (like making rent, or surviving tomorrow’s bombardment). Your biggest worries will become things that other people can only dream of worrying about, but they won’t be any less terrible for you.
- asimovfan 4y agoOnly meditation (samadhi) and discernment (prajna) can bring true happiness. Happiness means satisfaction and it means the end of all desires. If there is still some desire, happiness cannot exist.
- AuthorizedCust 4y agoPursuing status makes sense where the value of the decision rights or autonomy you get outweighs the cost of the pursuit. The value of the decision rights or autonomy can vary from person to person.
- Forestessential 4y agoin terms of employment status is a logical and ethical consideration. Tenure is status. But status is not reported acuratly but whichever metric it is of consideration of. and the status we think is appraised high might be a status that has actually a low apprasial.. Like being a porn star or a hollywood actor unlike Robin Williams. Or being a philisophical considerer- it might not be seen as of a high status but yet this underpins how we meet our death very much. downvote for all the reasons
- kayo_20211030 4y agoMany small things with which to disagree, but they're trivial and it's all-in-all a good piece. Let's not get stuck in the weeds here. More importantly, don't get stuck in the mud. Contentment is hard, but aim for it in a sensible way.
- peace177 4y ago[dead]