3 ms·

Until I moved to San Francisco ten years ago my identity was wrapped up in my home region of my home state. SF was where I finally let it go. I can perfectly

by just_me 18y ago

Until I moved to San Francisco ten years ago my identity was wrapped up in my home region of my home state. SF was where I finally let it go. I can perfectly remember the moment I realized I could. How exhilarating that was! And it started a landslide. I'll bet I don't have 10% the identity I did back then. (It helped that I had long before figured out that when people speak of "X pride" or "Proud to be X", it means that X sucks. Say this without laughing: "Proud to be a physicist at Lawrence Livermore". Then try googling "Harvard pride". Hmm, I didn't even know there was a Harvard, Illinois.) This is such a ridiculously brilliant essay. How in the hell does Paul keep doing this? I've been living this exact strategy for years and even advising people to do it too. Yet for me it remained a jumble of half-considered thoughts. (Please don't tell me I should reconsider having "smart guy" within my identity.) Another triumph, Paul. Thank you.

gnaritas 18y ago
> This is such a ridiculously brilliant essay. Um.. I think that's going a bit far. Interesting take on well known fact that people who identify heavily with something aren't very rational about being challenged on it, but "ridiculously brilliant", I think not.
- gravitycop 18y ago
  Interesting take on well known fact that people who identify heavily with something aren't very rational about being challenged on it A few others on the same topic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Industrial_Society_and_Its_Future http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Industrial_Society_and_Its_Fut... http://www.google.com/search?q=eysenck+psychology+of+politics http://www.google.com/search?q=eysenck+psychology+of+politic...
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
- just_me 18y ago
  He started with "Why do political and religious discussions suck?" and ended up with a recipe to make oneself smarter. I wonder how many tens of millions of people have wondered that exact thing and ended up with "Well, some topics are just inherently controversial"?
  - gnaritas 18y ago
    Sorry, it just wasn't really particularly insightful. Buddhists have been teaching detachment for thousands of years, slow and methodical destruction of the ego until you become totally an observer, purely aware. You are not your car, you are not your job, you are not your religion, etc, etc, this is not anything new, and while it is wise, it's certainly not some stunningly brilliant new idea from Paul. I'm not knocking Paul either, I very much like his writing, some of his essays are fantastic, but c'mon, this isn't that great. The word fanboy'ism springs to mind.
- socialarchetype 18y ago
  this is a discussion of identity politics. it's old hat. seriously, the hat is in its forties. there are entire disciplines in academia devoted to questions about the function of identity in contemporary american society. that said, it's well-written and provocative. what is actually smart here is not the old-ass idea, it is the application of that idea to a question/problem that regular readers of the internet forums commonly have. for that, this is commendable. i never would have thought i would have found a discussion of identity here and i am impressed by this community's genuine interest.

by just_me 18y ago

gnaritas 18y ago

> This is such a ridiculously brilliant essay. Um.. I think that's going a bit far. Interesting take on well known fact that people who identify heavily with something aren't very rational about being challenged on it, but "ridiculously brilliant", I think not.

gravitycop 18y ago
Interesting take on well known fact that people who identify heavily with something aren't very rational about being challenged on it A few others on the same topic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Industrial_Society_and_Its_Future http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Industrial_Society_and_Its_Fut... http://www.google.com/search?q=eysenck+psychology+of+politics http://www.google.com/search?q=eysenck+psychology+of+politic...
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
just_me 18y ago
He started with "Why do political and religious discussions suck?" and ended up with a recipe to make oneself smarter. I wonder how many tens of millions of people have wondered that exact thing and ended up with "Well, some topics are just inherently controversial"?
- gnaritas 18y ago
  Sorry, it just wasn't really particularly insightful. Buddhists have been teaching detachment for thousands of years, slow and methodical destruction of the ego until you become totally an observer, purely aware. You are not your car, you are not your job, you are not your religion, etc, etc, this is not anything new, and while it is wise, it's certainly not some stunningly brilliant new idea from Paul. I'm not knocking Paul either, I very much like his writing, some of his essays are fantastic, but c'mon, this isn't that great. The word fanboy'ism springs to mind.
socialarchetype 18y ago
this is a discussion of identity politics. it's old hat. seriously, the hat is in its forties. there are entire disciplines in academia devoted to questions about the function of identity in contemporary american society. that said, it's well-written and provocative. what is actually smart here is not the old-ass idea, it is the application of that idea to a question/problem that regular readers of the internet forums commonly have. for that, this is commendable. i never would have thought i would have found a discussion of identity here and i am impressed by this community's genuine interest.