Ask HN: Do worthwhile things have to be hard? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Do worthwhile things have to be hard?

19 pointsdhruvkar20 comments

I subconsciously find myself discarding endeavors that seem "too easy", even if the end result would be beneficial, in favor of things that seem "hard" [0].

They somehow seem more worthwhile.

E.G. I might discard learning the piano in favor of learning the guitar, because piano seems "easy", and guitar seems exponentially harder. Objectively, one is not more worthwhile than the other. Except since guitar is 'harder', it seems more worthy of pursuit.

Do you do this as well? Are you driving yourself a little crazy pursuing this vague metric? I can't seem to stop.

[0] Easy and Hard are in quotes to denote subjectivity. These concepts vary from person to person obviously.

View on HN

I have a bad habit of getting into something new, learning the fundamentals, and then moving on.

But as for why you might drop something easy for something harder, it might be as simple as that before you learned how to play the piano, it was hard. But as you learned the fundamentals of how to read music and play, it became easier and the guitar might be new territory that is hard because you haven't learned it yet- so it's exciting fresh territory.

Another situation where I might quit is if I reached something really hard and I don't think it's worth the effort to get over the hurdle. I think this is usually what makes people quit or avoid learning something new. I personally have learned that I am more likely to quit if I'm not at the right skill level. For example, I picked up The Intelligent Investor, skimmed the table of contents, found a topic I was interested in, flipped to page 300+, and I had no idea what the author was talking about, probably because I skipped the first 300 pages.

I think when people try to move too fast beyond their skill level (intentionally or unintentionally), they end up hitting a barrier because they're missing prerequisites. Then they're more likely to quit because they start to wonder if they're stupid rather than realizing they just didn't learn all the previous steps that were required. And no one likes to feel stupid so they quit and do something that makes them happy and feel smart.

I do this too. But i think for me, its that I get to a point where I have a really good understanding of something, but realize that spending incremental time on even more expertise on the subject has only marginal returns.

Like if I already have a good understanding of a subject or technology, it doesn't really make much sense for me to keep learning the nitty gritty details which I may never use. But instead am satisfied that I have a good enough base of knowledge that I would know what to look for if I encountered something I wanted to know within the field.

>> don't think it's worth the effort to get over the hurdle

definitely been there.

>> try to move too fast beyond their skill level (intentionally or unintentionally), they end up hitting a barrier because they're missing prerequisites

I am usually aware of this pitfall and enjoy rethinking my approach to include missed steps in learning something new.

>> I have a bad habit of getting into something new, learning the fundamentals, and then moving on.

Same

I mean, I think there is an agreed upon phenomenon that the more effort you put into something, the more you end up appreciating it. See, e.g., the Ikea Effect [0] and The Little Prince [1].

But I also think there's something that makes harder things more compelling to certain people. I'd be speculating to apply this to you, so let's take me for example. I've caught myself wanting to take the harder route or do the thing that is perceived to be more challenging, just to prove to myself that I can, and then to tell others about it, and not because it's inherently more appealing. I'll take the longer hiking path, I'll bike in a higher gear, I'll go backpack alone in South America over Europe, etc.

Because there might be something lingering underneath it all, a fear or insecurity, maybe a voice from a teacher or parents years ago, that says I can't, so I want to disprove it.

Also let me suggest something - by choosing the harder thing, you somehow have more latitude to fail. Didn't master classical guitar this year? Yeah that's understandable, because that'd be really difficult and most people can't. But if you choose something "easier" - like you didn't master a simple song on the piano - your sense of self worth might be more easily threatened.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IKEA_effect [1] This quote in particular sums up the point: "It is the time you have lost for your rose that makes your rose so important."

>> by choosing the harder thing, you somehow have more latitude to fail.

Spot on, I'm getting the sense from this thread, that it's really insecurities (in a few different areas), which might prompt one to pursue a harder course.

What’s your motivation for starting the endeavors in the first place? If you’re willing to give something up because it’s too easy, you are probably thinking about it incorrectly. Becoming the world’s number one pianist is not an easy task, it would takes years, or a lifetime.

Regardless, if you were on track to become the world’s best pianist and then gave it up because guitar is “harder”, why did you even want to be the world’s best pianist in the first place?

It sounds like you are dabbling in a bunch of things trying to see if somehow the learning of a new skill will give you a sense of enrichment. It will, however, that will fade quickly.

After learning a new skill and becoming “good” at it, there’s a lull phase where you think things are easy. That’s because you don’t know what you don’t know. Mastery of almost anything is hard and takes a long time.

All of this returns to motivation though. If you are looking for a short term sense of accomplishment, then dabble in a bunch of stuff and get “good” at it. If you are looking for a pursuit, find some motivation that will drive you to try and master something.

>> That’s because you don’t know what you don’t know. Mastery of almost anything is hard and takes a long time.

Completely agree. However, deciding whether something is easy or hard happens well before mastery.

>> dabbling in a bunch of things trying to see if somehow the learning of a new skill will give you a sense of enrichment.

This might well be true :)

Not necessarily. There's always a chance you'll find something you learn really quickly/turn out to be really good at, and enjoy despite not struggling at all. A prodigy might still find their favoured subject areas to be interesting.

And then there's also the fact many worthwhile things turn out to be merely tedious grinds, not particularly difficult. Doing exercise may or may not be 'hard' (depending on the person), but going to the gym or going for a run for 365 days a year might not be all that easy of an endeavour, even if the actual challenge level is virtually nil.

As for your example, well the best answer would be to go and learn what you'd enjoy more in the end, not based on whether it's seemingly easy or hard.

>E.G. I might discard learning the piano in favor of learning the guitar, because piano seems "easy", and guitar seems exponentially harder. Objectively, one is not more worthwhile than the other. Except since guitar is 'harder', it seems more worthy of pursuit.

Hypotethically, do you end up learning either or do you find something harder and move on to that?

Could be a defense mechanism to keep yourself from feeling like you’re failing, always working on something you perceive as hard without actually finishing anything.

>> Could be a defense mechanism to keep yourself from feeling like you’re failing, always working on something you perceive as hard without actually finishing anything.

This seems spot on, never considered this.

>> Hypotethically, do you end up learning either or do you find something harder and move on to that?

A few I've stuck with, but the vast majority I stop pursuing after gaining a basic understanding.

I see some parallels in what you said with myself. But I think for me it comes down to opportunity cost.

It's not that I actively seek to do things that are harder. But I feel like if I'm going to spend the time doing something, it might as well have multiple benefits or be more "unique" or "different".

For example, I recently went on a backpacking trip. I decided to do the more difficult route. Not because I wanted more of a challenge, but because if I was going to do all of the work to travel to that distant location, I should probably complete as much of the trail as possible.

When it comes to projects, I pick the harder ones because if I'm going to spend the next 3 months working on something, I might as well do something I don't know much about, and learn something new.

For me, it's always about getting the most value out of my time spent on something. But I do agree, that often times if I just worked on something that I find easy, I could get a product to market, or finish projects quickly. I am in this stage of my life now where I feel like I've built up a solid knowledge base by challenging myself and I am now exploring how to monetize those skills better.

Though I don't think something must be hard to be worthwhile, I think there's something in what you say. 'Trust in what is difficult' is a theme in the works of one of my favourite poets, Rainer Maria Rilke. It is the focus of 'The Man Watching': http://www.michaelppowers.com/wisdom/rilke.html

Thanks for that. Enjoyed the poem.

I don't think so.

I'm a software engineer by profession. I really enjoy my job, I'm good at it, and I don't find it too difficult. I do, however, recognize that what I do on a day to day basis can be categorized as highly skilled labor, which is why it also pays a bunch. Making software is not easy for the average person, but somehow it jives with the way I think.

So it's worthwhile and not hard, at least for me.

I may not be putting all this into words too well. I've thought about what you're asking before, in the context of my job.

You seem to prioritize status over substance, does that sound accurate?

I would have thought the opposite! I kick myself for spending so much time working on esoteric systems-level things I'll likely never be able to monetize, while some friends do SEO/clickbait/celeb news stuff with little technical merit and drive BMWs.

not completely, although there is some truth to this.

The example of guitar vs piano isn't far off from my real life experience. Neither one has more status than the other in my view. In fact, I'd argue pianists seem to have a higher 'status' in contemporary and historical viewpoints.

However, I realize I do enjoy feeling and explaining the blood+sweat+tears behind an obtained result.

Well, you could be giving yourself status by pursuing things so you can brag about how much harder it is. Maybe you subconsciously want other people to be impressed that you have a rare skill that few possess.

But it doesn't really sound like you have an actual problem anyway. Doing tough things because they are tough and interesting is a fine way to live, it has a lot of upside.

I don't quite grok your example, as I don't feel piano is any easier than guitar.

However, it's often far simpler to transition from a more rigorous pursuit to an 'easier' one. For this reason it could be logical to (e.g.) pursue an arduous, low-paying math PhD over a cushy tech job.

Regarding piano vs guitar, it's easier to play the same composition on piano than on guitar, but you can play much more complex compositions on the piano (ones which would require two guitars). So, both instruments can take decades to master.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com