9 ms·

All goals are imaginary.

by maxbond 1y ago

leakycap 1y ago
Goals are not impossible/fanciful or they cannot be met. You're thinking of daydreams or wishes.
- maxbond 1y ago
  Goals don't need to be fully realized to be useful. Ambitious goals are never fully realized. This is like saying a compass is only useful if you travel all the way to the north pole. To offer a concrete example, mathematicians failed to unify mathematics. They discovered it was impossible. But that's an important result, and there were other valuable intermediate results (like set theory). There was an article here the other day about how the Sagrada Familia is nearly finished. Gaudi's original vision would have involved bulldozing a bunch of surrounding homes and businesses. That's unlikely to happen. Regardless, the project is considered a huge achievement in architecture.
  - leakycap 1y ago
    > Goals don't need to be fully realized to be useful. Maybe you're thinking of an aspiration? Goals are achievable. > Ambitious goals are never fully realized. "Unreachable aspirations are never fully realized" is accurate. However, I've reached many actual "ambitious goals" in life, because whether easy or difficult goals are things you can fully realize. > This is like saying a compass is only useful if you travel all the way to the north pole. I have no idea where this example came from and it seems to only be half explained. But, a compass is useful because it gives you direction -- not because you expect to reach the North Pole every time you check direction. An aspiration provides value in the pursuit itself and the valuable discoveries you make along the way. Aspiration: A journey (still valuable, but you might not reach or even have an exact destination) Goal: A destination (As in "achievable" -- see "A" in S.M.A.R.T. goals, a very common framework for understanding how to set and use goals effectively) Let's not confuse the two concepts. It serves no purpose and might actually get in the way of your success.
    - maxbond 1y ago
      To be honest this is splitting hairs. If our disagreement is semantic, then I don't really care to discuss it further, you can use whatever terminology you please and it isn't a problem or something that needs to be hashed out. Presenting a disagreement as a "misunderstanding" on my part because I don't use your terminology is disingenuous. I assure you, differences in terminology will not interfere in my success. Just like speaking a different language wouldn't interfere. I will leave you with a final thought. If an aspiration is a goal that can't be realized - then we only know this in retrospect. All goals are possible until proven otherwise. Russell and Whitehead thought mathematics could be unified. Who are we to judge them as fools? They didn't know what we know, because they taught us.
      - leakycap 1y ago
        I am not responsible for the commonly understood meaning and definitions of words in the English language. People learn something new every day. This is your opportunity to learn how goals (which are always achievable) are different than things like wishes, daydreams, hopes, or even aspirations. If you'd rather not learn, that's OK. But it is not disingenuous to correctly define a word when someone else is misusing it repeatedly. > All goals are possible until proven otherwise. I'll enjoy this more than you know.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
        maxbond 1y ago
        Thank you for the lesson. If I could return the favor, you may be interested in linguistic descriptivism. You probably won't agree with it but it may be educational nonetheless. I'm always happy to put a smile on someone's face, but I think if you reflect on it you'll find that you have evidence to support the impossibility of goals you believe impossible (in other words, they have been "proven otherwise" in the past). If you've made up your mind without any evidence, well, you do you but that may be a belief that hinders you rather than helps.
- godelski 1y ago
  You willfully misinterpreted maxbond. Why? All goals begin with imagination, daydreams, or wishes. Whichever you want to call it. Every single one of them begins in your head before they become reality. So what's your beef here? I know you're not that dumb, as you're actively demonstrating the capacity for metacognition. So what are you actually trying to argue? Besides, so what if all your dreams don't come true. Do you still not have them? I'm sure you've settled for things. Did your idealistic dream not help you make those decisions? It'd be lunacy to suggest that they did not. There would be no compromise or settling if this higher desire did not exist. Similarly, in the other direction, the fear or dystopia. Do you not have 5 year, 10 year, and other long term goals? Do these not change? I'd call you a liar if you were able to pursue precisely the path you thought things would take over a long period of time, because I know you're not omniscient. *Your lived experience demonstrates the utility of wishful thinking.* Good god, my pet cat has dreams and desires that she'll never obtain yet help her pursue her more realistic goals. There's the saying "Shoot for the moon, land in the trees". Shooting for the moon gave you direction and landing in the trees still gave you progress, right? Why are you being so flippant?
  - leakycap 1y ago
    > Good god, my pet cat has dreams and desires that she'll never obtain yet help her pursue her more realistic goals. followed one breath later with this lack of self-awareness: > Why are you being so flippant? Your exasperation in the form of italics doesn't do much for your argument.
    - maxbond 1y ago
      To be quite frank with you, you wouldn't be making tone arguments if you had a substantive point to make. And their use of italics is really not so different from your use of a "hint" parenthetical. Reading between the lines, I'm pretty sure your real disagreement here is aesthetic. Perhaps it feels icky or touchy feely to you. And your semantic and tone arguments are reverse engineered from that perspective. But if I'm wrong I'd be interested to hear you answer GP's question.
      - 1y ago

All goals are imaginary.

leakycap 1y ago

Goals are not impossible/fanciful or they cannot be met. You're thinking of daydreams or wishes.

maxbond 1y ago
Goals don't need to be fully realized to be useful. Ambitious goals are never fully realized. This is like saying a compass is only useful if you travel all the way to the north pole. To offer a concrete example, mathematicians failed to unify mathematics. They discovered it was impossible. But that's an important result, and there were other valuable intermediate results (like set theory). There was an article here the other day about how the Sagrada Familia is nearly finished. Gaudi's original vision would have involved bulldozing a bunch of surrounding homes and businesses. That's unlikely to happen. Regardless, the project is considered a huge achievement in architecture.
- leakycap 1y ago
  > Goals don't need to be fully realized to be useful. Maybe you're thinking of an aspiration? Goals are achievable. > Ambitious goals are never fully realized. "Unreachable aspirations are never fully realized" is accurate. However, I've reached many actual "ambitious goals" in life, because whether easy or difficult goals are things you can fully realize. > This is like saying a compass is only useful if you travel all the way to the north pole. I have no idea where this example came from and it seems to only be half explained. But, a compass is useful because it gives you direction -- not because you expect to reach the North Pole every time you check direction. An aspiration provides value in the pursuit itself and the valuable discoveries you make along the way. Aspiration: A journey (still valuable, but you might not reach or even have an exact destination) Goal: A destination (As in "achievable" -- see "A" in S.M.A.R.T. goals, a very common framework for understanding how to set and use goals effectively) Let's not confuse the two concepts. It serves no purpose and might actually get in the way of your success.
  - maxbond 1y ago
    To be honest this is splitting hairs. If our disagreement is semantic, then I don't really care to discuss it further, you can use whatever terminology you please and it isn't a problem or something that needs to be hashed out. Presenting a disagreement as a "misunderstanding" on my part because I don't use your terminology is disingenuous. I assure you, differences in terminology will not interfere in my success. Just like speaking a different language wouldn't interfere. I will leave you with a final thought. If an aspiration is a goal that can't be realized - then we only know this in retrospect. All goals are possible until proven otherwise. Russell and Whitehead thought mathematics could be unified. Who are we to judge them as fools? They didn't know what we know, because they taught us.
    - leakycap 1y ago
      I am not responsible for the commonly understood meaning and definitions of words in the English language. People learn something new every day. This is your opportunity to learn how goals (which are always achievable) are different than things like wishes, daydreams, hopes, or even aspirations. If you'd rather not learn, that's OK. But it is not disingenuous to correctly define a word when someone else is misusing it repeatedly. > All goals are possible until proven otherwise. I'll enjoy this more than you know.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - maxbond 1y ago
        Thank you for the lesson. If I could return the favor, you may be interested in linguistic descriptivism. You probably won't agree with it but it may be educational nonetheless. I'm always happy to put a smile on someone's face, but I think if you reflect on it you'll find that you have evidence to support the impossibility of goals you believe impossible (in other words, they have been "proven otherwise" in the past). If you've made up your mind without any evidence, well, you do you but that may be a belief that hinders you rather than helps.
godelski 1y ago
You willfully misinterpreted maxbond. Why? All goals begin with imagination, daydreams, or wishes. Whichever you want to call it. Every single one of them begins in your head before they become reality. So what's your beef here? I know you're not that dumb, as you're actively demonstrating the capacity for metacognition. So what are you actually trying to argue? Besides, so what if all your dreams don't come true. Do you still not have them? I'm sure you've settled for things. Did your idealistic dream not help you make those decisions? It'd be lunacy to suggest that they did not. There would be no compromise or settling if this higher desire did not exist. Similarly, in the other direction, the fear or dystopia. Do you not have 5 year, 10 year, and other long term goals? Do these not change? I'd call you a liar if you were able to pursue precisely the path you thought things would take over a long period of time, because I know you're not omniscient. *Your lived experience demonstrates the utility of wishful thinking.* Good god, my pet cat has dreams and desires that she'll never obtain yet help her pursue her more realistic goals. There's the saying "Shoot for the moon, land in the trees". Shooting for the moon gave you direction and landing in the trees still gave you progress, right? Why are you being so flippant?
- leakycap 1y ago
  > Good god, my pet cat has dreams and desires that she'll never obtain yet help her pursue her more realistic goals. followed one breath later with this lack of self-awareness: > Why are you being so flippant? Your exasperation in the form of italics doesn't do much for your argument.
  - maxbond 1y ago
    To be quite frank with you, you wouldn't be making tone arguments if you had a substantive point to make. And their use of italics is really not so different from your use of a "hint" parenthetical. Reading between the lines, I'm pretty sure your real disagreement here is aesthetic. Perhaps it feels icky or touchy feely to you. And your semantic and tone arguments are reverse engineered from that perspective. But if I'm wrong I'd be interested to hear you answer GP's question.
    - 1y ago