Crazy or Disciplined?
dilbert.com
dilbert.com
"The best you can hope for in this life is that your delusions are benign and your compulsions have utility."
In my mind, the whole post is very much worth reading. "This life" is basically here and now since times and societies change.
Reminds me of how back in the day I chose to do software although I had other talents and passions as well. It was not an easy choice but here I am now.
Assuming you don't believe 2 members of every terrestrial species fit in a wooden boat and repopulated the entire Earth from complete extinction during man's lifetime, you are probably more sane than average.
EDIT: source: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/primetime/US/views_of_bible_p...
There is some research into the problem space, the ascent, the feeling of victory, but the descent (aka the supporting code around the core problem) while possibly challenging just isn't satisfying.
If you're able (hourly pay/equity/whatever) and want to see some of your things get off the ground, find someone else that hasn't climbed those boring/supporting peaks and give them a chance to help and to do some climbing of their own.
There is a fine line between barking at the moon and a 5% chance of success? Really? I think a more apt comparison would be barking at the moon and selling all your possessions to buy as many lottery tickets as you can.
OCD is compared to disciplined exercise?
If Warren Buffet were born in medieval times, I doubt he would be considered crazy. He'd probably end up being seen and resourceful (having read his biography).
Lastly, I resent the comparison of religion to insanity.
Where I do agree is the notion that entrepreneurship requires some leap of faith that tends to go against the typical career route most professionals are ingrained with. However, I think most sane entrepreneurs (heh) usually have some background and expertise that will increase their chances of success in their venture.
Taking measured risk is not that close to crazy. People do it when they switch jobs or careers.
For what it's worth, he's not comparing religion to insanity by saying they're the same thing. He's saying all three people (or the fourth with the atheist) can't each be right.
Which is true.
Not so fast. There are propositons in arithmetic which are unprovable, Even getting the 3 (or 4) individuals to come up with a common set of boolean propositions is probably difficult, to say the least. Then coming up with a means to prove...
Depends on how carefully measured the risk is, what the possible payouts are, what the fallback plan is... and it depends on whose perspective is being taken.
Where do you draw the line between "taking a good risk", "taking a bad risk", and "taking a crazy stupid risk"? What happens when you think a risk is good and everyone around you think it's stupid and you're crazy for taking it?
I'd never buy a lottery ticket, but I have long-term disability insurance. Both have a negative expected value and a rare but high possible payout. The only thing that makes insurance "smart" and the lottery "crazy" is that with insurance the payoff happens exactly in the circumstance you need it to. Sometimes the line between smart and crazy is really, really thin.
When I think of "measured risk", I think of investing. Any kind, whether it's buying stocks or VCs investing money in your company. Both actions carry some risk.. much like becoming an entrepreneur carries risk. But in any of these situations you can do some sort of due diligence whether it's knowing the fundamentals of a stock and knowledge of a sector (when buying a stock), looking at metrics/product and understanding an industry (VCs) or having experience and knowledge of a certain sector and having the domain expertise to accomplish your goals (entrepreneurship).
The drawing example is good, though. Reminds me of moral luck: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-luck/