Ask HN: What advice messed up your life?
This could be advice from anyone including your parents, teachers/professors, friends, etc.
Every single piece of bad advice I have ever received was from someone who didn't like their life. If you're unhappy, you have two basic options. You can do something to make yourself happier, or you can rationalise a reason why happiness isn't possible. The former is generally a steady upward slog. The latter is like quicksand - the longer you're there, the more solidly you become stuck.
All the bad career advice I got was from people who didn't like their job. Some believed that jobs were just inherently unpleasant, so you might as well go for the unpleasantness that pays the most and gives the best pension. Some believed that good jobs were just inaccessible for 'the likes of us', so there's no point getting you hopes up. Some were so uncertain of their employability that they took the first job offered to them and never dared do anything to jeopardise it. I heard rationalisations dressed up as philosophy, as ethics, as macroeconomics, but they were rationalisations all the same.
Learning from the mistakes of others is useful and productive, but an unhappy person can never provide any insight into how to be happy. Either they don't know what would make them happy, or worse, they do know but won't do it. Never underestimate how hard someone will work to rationalise why they just can't go back to college or start their own business or visit Europe or leave their awful wife.
When seeking advice, ignore status, intelligence and experience. Seek out the happy people, they're the only people who can help you.
>>When seeking advice, ignore status, intelligence and experience. Seek out the happy people, they're the only people who can help you.
That argument needs that I would become happy following the same path as the person giving advice. That is just not true for quite a few happy people I know.
Out of curiosity, are you happy with your life? :)
You will gain something by listening to anyone. "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." And even though THAT advice is thousands of years old, we are nothing to each other if we cannot learn vicariously from shared experience.
But there are very few philosophers I would want to take advice from. I'd like a debate with Nietzsche, Schopenhaeur, Kant, ... and many others.
But would I take their advice about how to live my life in a pragmatic way? Hell, no.
Secondly, advice is about what you should do, not what is true. A subtle, but important, distinction.
This chimes with my personal experience. I suppose the demographic I'm from in the UK gave me certain blind spots and self imposed ceilings. I'm now 25 and only just starting to figure out and balance against them.
I grew up in a small fishing village in the North of Scotland - where everyone (and I mean everyone) was very supportive of education and the idea that anyone pretty much do anything they wanted if they had ability and worked hard enough. My parents weren't well off but all 4 of my siblings and I went to university.
My wife comes from a urban-working class background in a post-industrial area near Glasgow, she is extremely bright and went to University at 16. However, she had to constantly battle a "that's not for the likes of us" attitude from everyone in her community, including her parents (who are nice people, but just don't "get it").
When we first met she always made fun of me for having no concept of "class" whereas it was something that had always been made clear to her by her peers. Ironically, she became a lawyer and entered that bastion of upper middle class eccentric respectablilty: the Scottish Bar.
Some people are bitter by design. No matter what I do, I will always have many complains to be unhappy about. Right now, I am trying to boot-up my startup. If it doesn't work, I will be bitter. If it works out, I will be bitter about my other pet peeve - schools killing creativity and I would like to contribute towards making it better. If it too is sorted out, I would be bitter about people being bitter about each other owing to religious, regional or some other non-rational biases. I am bitter about Government corruption and lack of infrastructure in my country. I am bitter about common man's rights not implemented in spirit. I am bitter about morons dividing people on religion and reason, and worse, people listening to them.
All of these isn't going to change(some might) in my lifetime. And the only way to be happy about it is to turn a blind eye. If happiness is ignorance, I don't seek it.
This would be blatant generalization, but many happy people I have met are blissfully ignorant. They have accepted life as is, and are happy with the current state of thing.
I generally listen to all advice, and ignore most of it - the adviser being happy or not doesn't figure in my criteria.
Of course, things should be placed in context. An advice of a bitter math teacher on mathematics will always be better than an advice from a happy ignorant person.
On a personal note, don't be bitter. You can accomplish the same without the bitterness, it's just weighing you down.
He assumes there is no reason to be unhappy, completely ignoring the various reasons I have pointed out and stated that ignoring them would lead to bliss, but that's not what I seek.
What about what-not-to-do advice?
You can go further than rationalization of one's choices to a desire to validate them by preventing success by others.
The nice thing about this kind of ego-shrinking is that it's combined with inspiration to do something about it, rather than just feeling deflated. There's so much interesting stuff out there.
"Dweck discovered that those who think that innate intelligence is the key to success begin to discount the importance of effort. I am smart, the kids’ reasoning goes; I don’t need to put out effort. Expending effort becomes stigmatized—it’s public proof that you can’t cut it on your natural gifts."
tl;dr: Praise kids for their hard work, not for being smart.
End result of that approach is that the kids learn that hard work matters, but results don't. Now you have someone who'll optimize for "hours put in", worrying more about whether they're impressing the boss with their work ethic than about the quality of the end results they're delivering. Sort of a common feature of corporate culture, where the guy who stays late and comes in weekends is praised, even if the guy who went home at 5pm every day is the one producing most of the working code.
The other lesson you learn from that is: if you solve a major problem in two hours, withhold the result and pretend you spent two weeks working on it, then present it later and get praised for working hard on the problem for two weeks and solving it.
It just didn't make any sense: I was 23 years old, had plenty of talent, and could't wait to get out of Nebraska, but I was supposed to buy a house? I couldn't think of a worse way to spend my money, time, and freedom.
Instead of spending my evenings fixing up my "house," I was blogging and learning to code. Instead of spending my money on a mortgage and property taxes, I bought GOOG & AAPL.
After a few years, a startup in Silicon Valley found me, liked my blog, and moved me out to California. Once I was done working for other people, I had enough of a stock portfolio to fund starting my own business.
If I had followed that advice, I would still be in Nebraska, would owe more than my house would be worth, and would hate my job/life.
"The best investment you can make" is always in yourself.
The property bubble in Australia hasn't burst yet, so I'm still listening to this. It's painful. Sometimes I find it hard not to advise people to sell their houses now...
I think the cultural norm should be that if one way of learning isn't working for you, try another way. Practice, read it yourself, ask a friend for help, get a tutor, whatever you need.
This should have been good, but I came back from the first meeting not wanting to go back. I just didn't click with the group, and the language/environment they were using (Fortran on an IBM System/3x0 variant, I think) were of no interest to me.
This upset my father, in particular, because he was convinced that the programming I was doing in my bedroom (C, on a Commodore Amiga) was of no value. Programming a personal computer was fine for a kid, but making a career in software meant doing "serious" work, which to my (very non-tech) parents, meant programming IBM mainframes.
In retrospect, their career advice was about as bad as it could have been. I was learning exactly what I should have been learning. I was completely right to ignore them and continue doing what I was doing.
Except I could never shake the idea of "serious" vs. "not serious" software development. So while I continued to learn C, then learned C++, when I finished college in the mid-90s I went into a "serious" industry . Despite living within walking distance of Netscape's old headquarters, I completely missed out on the dot-com era, justifying it by telling myself that I was doing "serious" work. And while I've never been unemployed, until this year, I can't say I ever did anything remotely notable, or fun, either.
And worse of all: it became obvious within the last 3-4 years that my industry was a career dead-end. If I stuck with it, I'd eventually be one of those stereotypical unemployed, and unemployable, 40-something developers.
But there is a silver lining: over the last couple of years I started playing around with some new technologies and ended up reinventing myself. Earlier this year, I quit my old job and am now working for a startup that's doing stuff that's nowhere near my Dad's old idea of "serious". But I've treated my new job seriously, working harder than at any time in my career. And I'm happier now than I've been in nearly a decade.
"Change the system from the inside" - If you are apart of a system that encourages physical and mental abuse of its members, don't try to change it, leave. Systems include: Fraternity, Brotherhoods, Cults, Gangs, Churches, Country, Jobs and the like. In general don't try to change systems, just move to a better one.
"dating will get easier in your 30s"
Supposedly this really is true for men. Not for me yet.
This is not just untrue for me, but dramatic and stark in a way that has surprised me a lot. I have some really awkward hair loss and I get mistaken for a college student at age 34, and that doesn't help. To a couple orders of approximation, women now have absolutely and universally no sexual interest in me, and this just wasn't true in my 20s. (This is despite me having more money now and being lot more sure of myself, more comfortable with people, less shy, and in better physical shape.)
Why is it someone else's responsibility to make you live your life the "right" way? I thought your bad advice post was fine up until you were blaming other people for how you lived your life.
I ignored his advice. I've had a fantastic career and shipped a bunch of different products.
30 years later, he apologized to me.
Plus it's easier to see now, Dad uses the internet every day now so it's easier to see how much job opportunity is there.
If I were a blacksmith in a mediaeval village I would make sure my kids knew that they were tool makers, not blacksmiths. People will always need tools weather they are made in a forge or a factory.
Despite a lot of it simply consisting of mucking around, a lot of generic information and knowledge stuck consistently. Despite being told frequently I was 'wasting my life away', in the process I was slowly sponging in information that would later assist me in launching a startup that nowadays employs even my father. :)
I do wish that early on my parents were more supportive of my passions and interests, and it's a mistake I hope not to make with my own children. When you see passion in someone, be it with any topic, it shouldn't matter whether or not it's something that can generate financial stability. These days with the sheer size of the internet -- there's a market (rule 34 I think ;)).
Do what you love, find interesting ways to fuel others with your passion and you can make just about anything pay the rent.
Your knowledge in various domains likely helps you in ways that aren't immediately apparent. (Team sports, for example, are great for health but also for social skills.)
Also, every time I interview someone, I ask them how they got into programming. So far, there's been no strong correlation between quality and years of experience. The people who started programming in elementary school are just as likely to be crappy as those who didn't start until college.
The strongest predictor I've seen for engineer quality is college GPA. People who work hard and get things done also tend to get good grades.
1. Expertise in something the college values. For Ivy Leagues and the like, that's usually something academic or artistic. For military academies, that's leadership. Athletics for some schools, though you've gotta be world class or clearly heading there.
2. Good grades (unless you're going for a sports scholarship)
3. A few interesting extra-curriculars to show you can 'multitask' and aren't completely 1 dimensional.
But many parents seem to over-emphasize #3 to the detriment of #1 and #2. If you take them seriously you'll find yourself a jack of many trades, master of none. But it's the masters of particular trades/crafts/domains/knowledge these days that are irreplaceable, un-interchangeable, and who make the advances that push the human race forward, not the jacks.
And the ability to truly master something is difficult, a skill in and of itself. Those who develop that skill early in life will have a significant advantage over those who don't.
So if you find yourself trying to do all three and struggling to keep all those balls in the air, don't be afraid to drop #3. It's expendable.
There are times that I envy young, successful founders running companies worth millions, laser-focused on their goals from childhood to adulthood, but then again I sort of do a double-take and think: They couldn't have been this awesome without missing some important aspects (to me anyway) of life. Aspects like falling in love, winning a girl's heart, getting into trouble, exploring new places, learning a musical instrument and hanging out with people with different interests and intelligence (street smart or artsy types). I mean, you can only be young once (and of course, your hormones would only be THIS active once).
Most of this will be considered a massive waste of time for some people (I certainly considered all my years spent playing games a waste. Damnit.). Still moderation is key.
Oh, I didn't start seriously programming until I went to college, and life didn't turn out so bad. (Still, no million-dollar company under my name though =()
It's just something people say to console, not actually anything that's remotely useful or true. Magic never happens on its own. You have to go out there and make it happen.
I hate to break it to you, but the most successful people in society usually got there not only from hard work but from being in the right place at the right time.
According to studies on "luck", one key is to be in a LOT of places. It increases your chance of being in some right place at some right time. Another key is a positive attitude, of seeing opportunities and taking advantage of them.
So it is difficult to tell when someone's behavior (work) causes a success versus when it truly is a lucky break.
Whenever I've taken initiative and grabbed the situation by the horns to change, it's been for the better.
I argued that that was a nonsensical claim, although over the previous 30 years it was pretty much true (the UK dip in the early 1990s was quite short and localized). In mid 2007 I noticed prices continuing to go up and up and bit the bullet. Naturally, I exchanged contracts the very month before prices started to go down. Out of principle, I'm stuck with this house until it's worth more than I paid for it ;-)
The bank and you made a mutually beneficial contract: the bank loans you money, and in return you promise to give them back their money plus interest or your collateral. If you've elected to assign a moral value to one of your options, it can only hurt you.
I've never done this myself, so definitely make sure you know what you're getting into.
You can, of course, default but if they sell your property for less than the outstanding amount, you're still on the line for the difference and can be bankrupted over it. Hardly a moral choice when so much of your life can be disturbed over it.
The "principle" I was referring to was not "not defaulting", btw, but not making a loss. I could sell, move, and take the loss, but I refuse, considering it'd put me in the tiny percentage of home owners who've ever made a loss. Sunk cost fallacy, sure, but I don't need to move yet, luckily.
Is this true when it's a student telling the outside world? It's a useful strategy to claim one's working really hard in school to explain why he hasn't been calling / doesn't want to visit over spring break / doesn't have a girlfriend / why the parents should keep sending money / etc.
My experience was the exact opposite. People liked to compete to see who had the most coursework to do. People would complain about having to pull all nighters, but still spend hours on youtube or facebook beforehand. Some people were genuinely overwhelmed with work, but it was never downplayed as far as I could tell.
Even though DBAs have more flexible hours, I wouldn't recommend a job with a pager to my worse enemies.
10 years later and I'm still trying to come up with a good way to get rid of it.
It kills electronics very well, and the tea taste a little better for it.
I achieved plenty, but realized late in college that constantly studying was a defense mechanism for depression and loneliness. It's my biggest college regret. I even think that if I had studied less and spent more time getting to know housemates and classmates, I would have been happier and more relaxed, leading to higher grades. Sharing life with others is a reward in itself though, which took me a while to understand.
This was not 100% terrible advice, because it did make me actually look outside the sphere of science and technology into areas I was before utterly uninterested in and considered to be faintly grimy. However in retrospect the premise is utterly flawed and there would have been much, much better ways to expand my interpersonal skills without feeling guilty about being passionate about technology and actually getting things done with it myself.
I got this advice in 2002. As long as I actually considered it useful, my life has been worse, as soon as I gave up on it, my life immediately got immensely better.
I didn't give up on technology entirely, but studied nanotech instead because I thought that was the next big thing and couldn't be outsourced so easily. Now that's only useful in a few huge companies or universities and I wish I had been programming all this time so I could do my own cool projects without millions of dollars.
Better late than never, though - I am certainly happy.
Please try to use this as a source of motivation for staying fit, rather than as a reason for sorrow.
When I was a kid, my parents told me that little girls like me should study in a local college, get good grades, find a comfortable job (preferably an accountant), settle down in the same city (as my parents) and get married by 21 (years).
My college was in a different city as compared to where I grew up. This really helped in teaching me how to live on my own. I took to computers, interned at a couple of companies and got hired by another software company, moved to the United States, and dated and married a fellow computer nerd a little over a month ago (let's just say I'm way over 21 now).
I think I did well.
Outside of that, not much. But I tend to be pretty selective about the advice I take anyway... I'm the kind of person who tends to "keep my own council" more often than not (or, as my dad would say, I'm hard-headed). So I tend to ignore a lot of the well-meaning advice I've been given.. so I miss out by ignoring some good advice here and there, but I also avoid most of the bad advice.
For the most part, I'd look back and say that approach has worked out well for me.
-"Should I tell a recruiter or HR person about my current salary?"
Friend of mine said always tell, reveal everything and be truthful. The reality, I got fucking low balled on salary, pretty much they would not go above $5K of what I currently made. It wasn't till I spoke to someone else that told me NEVER tell your salary, either say you rather not say or give a large range. So far giving a range has worked out for me every time. I give a large range and they tend to lean towards the high end.
- Never talk about sex, politics and religion on a date.
I found out it is the BEST way to quickly find out if you are compatible or not with someone. I am referring to if you're dating for a serious long term or possibly marriage relationship. Of course the way you talk about it does matter.
I have done this to everyone of my dates and I can tell right away if it's wort the effort or not. Usually it's the politics that is the deal breaker.
There were times in my life where acting on a particular bit of advice kept me from getting what I wanted. Those were frustrating times. But those times caused me to learn to deal with being frustrated; to stop and reflect on why I was reacting with such emotion.
There were times when the advice that I received was unclear, which made it easy for my motivation-to-follow to falter. I would waste time and not get homework done. Familiarity with a topic would grow more faint and my class performance would show it. And then I started to learn how to best use my time to learn the material. (In small groups, using multiple forms of engagement; reading/writing/speaking/listening)
The advice that, on-balance, seemed least helpful at the time:
* "such-and-such will happen when you least expect it"
* "don't ever give up"
* "don't run with scissors"
But in later reflection these lead me to different conclusions about these same items:
* The advisor understands that you're in pain, but really likes who you are when you're not moping. They're trying to help you get there, but they're not sure how.
* Admitting defeat is OK, and you can change focus (pivot) without stopping (giving up) entirely. This is a loophole. Use it.
* This has always been a good idea. Still is.
The advice I would offer would be to use advice wisely. Don't follow it blindly; reflect often, and be adaptable.
Glad I ignored that one. At universities in the UK, you choose a degree at the beginning then that's it.
The other poor advice was that county college is only for loosers. My advisors and teachers impressed this on me bigtime. In retrospect, county college would have been awesome to buy me a year or so until I was able to maturely handle a challenging curriculum. I needed some time to learn how to learn and gain some confidence in my ability to learn.
From that perspective; that I am in control and making the decisions in my life... I can't really say that any of the decisions that I have made have 'messed up' my life.
Whatever I've done, it clearly seemed like a good idea at the time. I probably couldn't have made the decision any differently.
(I find this kind of an interesting paradox, as my agency with regard to one thing, bad advice, implies my lack of agency with regard to my own bad decisions).
- love thy neighbour
- don't be selfish
- don't care about money/possessions
- don't judge
Oh, and also: install OpenOffice.org
2. Obviously being an inconsiderate jerk is a bad life strategy, but it's easy to embrace 'unselfishness' as the reason for not pursuing your talents until you reach brilliance, or not maximizing your earning potential. Most people don't have the energy to live their lives in the service of others (becoming aid workers or whatever), but many dabble in a sort of self-congratulatory mediocrity. Also breeds an unhealthy resentment for the entrepreneurs and geniuses that propel our civilization.
3. Not caring about money/possessions, all the while enjoying the material comfort brought by your parents' or society's wealth, is a sure fire way to end up in a situation when you don't have that comfort anymore. At which point you'll realize that you really do care about money/possessions, because you can't pretend anymore, reality has caught up with you.
4. 'Judge not and ye shall not be judged' is another ridiculous notion. Obviously it should be 'judge, and expect to be judged' - which leads to principles and integrity. Of course Christians want you to have principles/morality etc., but simultaneously to refrain from pronouncing judgement on those that fail to meet these standards. This means the bad people get away with a lot of stuff, and also makes you timid and unsure about what's right. Nothing's anchored, everything's a case of 'who knows what I would have done in their shoes.' Undermines your own will/agency (just say what you would do in their shoes, or what they should have done), and self-esteem (your only a noble person because you have an easy life blablabla)
In short these sorts of teachings make you constantly unsure of your place in the world and encourage poor career decisions.
1. "love thy neighbor" - Don't waste time hating people. Forgive and forget.
2. "don't be selfish" - Put others before yourself. Anyone who has been in a relationship will tell you this is a good idea, but it applies elsewhere as well. If you manage people at your job, put their needs above yours. It doesn't mean give up any ambitions of your own, but living a life focused solely on yourself doesn't yield happiness either.
3. "don't care about money/possessions" - The basic necessities, like a roof over your head and food on your plate, are fine. Spending your life in pursuit of material possessions isn't going to be satisfying. Having things is fine. Letting your life center around acquiring money and possessions isn't.
4. "don't judge" - You're not perfect, neither is anybody else. It's not about letting people get away with things, but not condemning them when they make mistakes.
1. Sorry, but the verse isn't 'try to get along with thy neighbour' or 'tolerate thy neighbour' it's love thy neighbour. I'm all for amicable and polite relations with people/strangers, but as far as i can tell the teaching really aspires to a sort of 'what would Jesus do?' level of care towards people wherever you find them.
2. I don't think putting others before yourself is a good idea, except in the case of close family or partners. Have faith in yourself, take opportunities where you find them, better yourself, don't feel bad about it - if you put others first you can't necessarily do those things, and whats more the others wont necessarily appreciate your action and/or see that it wasn't done in vain. Of course, you should still be honourable towards others.
3. Interior dialogue goes something like this - 'Well, what career should I choose? Medicine perhaps? Well, that makes lots of money, but I don't feel a natural calling for it. And since money isn't important, I ought to choose something else. I'll study English literature, which wont land me a high-paying job, but that's not what I care about.' Ten years later: 'Well writing isn't going to get me a job at all, so I'm not much different from an unskilled/uneducated member of the workforce. I feel I could achieve a lot and offer a lot to society, but now I'll just take a low paying office job. If I was a doctor, I could be having kids right now, buying a house, saving for their education, have long-term financial security and the ability to help other family members, going around the world on holiday having enriching experiences. Oh well.' Money gives you security and freedom, the idea of settling for the basic necessities is very dangerous IMO and not likely to lead to happiness.
4. Christianity at its core is about forgiveness, and in the end it leads to sacrificing justice for mercy, which leads to dysfunctional relationships or communities. Yeah 'nobody's perfect' is a good lesson but these teachings go further than that
2. The rising tide lifts all boats.
3. "Rosebud"
4. Mercy leads to dysfunctional relationships and communities? I'd hate to forget to return a library book in your town... ;)
2. Historically, the tide of people demanding sacrifice for others' sake tends to be a bloody one.
3. It's not a binary choice. The advice should be something like 'pursue wealth until it gives you the freedom and comfort you need for happiness, but be careful about pursuing more wealth than you know what to do with whilst neglecting your spiritual wellbeing.' But instead the advice is that beyond basic necessities, you shouldn't care about worldly possessions. This is really bad advice, it says nothing about what money can do for you.
4. Not mercy in itself, but the neglect of justice, which comes about readily when people can't make confident judgments. Mercy is desirable, but at what price?
To see that this is ridiculous, try substituting other emotions in for love: Happy thy neighbour, Angry thy neighbour, Sad thy neighbour.
In the phrase love is a solid verb. It is about taking the time to help the person out when they require external assistance.
Crawling out of bed at 3am to change the sheets after your kid pisses the bed -> Picking up an extra coffee at lunch for Bob at the office when he has had a ton of work dumped on him and can't get away from his desk.
Taking your spouse out to dinner to celebrate their new promotion -> Congratulating Sue from down the hall when her daughter makes the news for winning a spelling bee.
Picking up your brother from the airport -> Inviting the new guy over for a beer.
I would claim that all of these are loving actions but none of them require you to have exactly one special emotional state. Certainly, being dragged out of bed doesn't inspire much poetry at the time.
Further, none of these requires a specific justification beyond reducing human suffering/making the world a better place so you needn't exhaust yourself looking for reasons. And I certainly hope that welcoming the new guy without even knowing his qualities to judge him by doesn't devalue the act.
http://storycorps.org/listen/stories/julio-diaz/
I don't know this man's beliefs, but I can think of no better example of loving thy neighbor, being selfless, being unconcerned about possessions, and not judging. I think this is what Jesus would do.
Taking this story as an example of what it means to follow Jesus, I don't see how following him could leave a sense of unworthiness about one's character or lack of healthy ambition.
"Music is a hobby."
I'm catching up though.
In my experience, the people that make this statement rarely understand opportunity cost. It took me years to figure out that it's OK to let new opportunities pass you by if pursuing them would take your time away from the opportunities you're already committed to.
The more successful you get, the more opportunities come your way, so I think this is something successful people have to figure out eventually. If you make a success of one opportunity, it's always at the expense of another. It's good to be selective.
I can remember a lot of good advice that I didn't follow, though.
Conclusion: maybe I'm just not very good at following advice.
Better advice would have been to find a way to make money that I enjoy.
Regret is suffering. It is being attached to a different reality that you "should" be experiencing that is somehow better than the reality you are in. Everything that happened in your life, every single stupid thing, was required/essential/instrumental in your life being exactly as it is right now.
I hope we can make use of this thread as a means to help us guide future decisions without it functioning as a way to make us feel regret. Do not expend energy suffering over that which is not only out of your control, but an illusion. Your past is not reality: you are, right here, right now.
Many argue it's made use seem overly demanding to others, particularly bosses.
The naivety in thinking that you could become an astronaut or something special will probably mean you are more likely to reach your goal or at least go further than other people. I guess if you believe you have the ability to change the world, you probably will.
And it made me more concerned about fitting into little social groups than focusing on what I want to do.
My take on it is this: "you're special" is not a declaration of your supposed super-human intellect or abilities, but a reminder of your uniqueness and independence as a person who can choose to distinguish yourself if you choose to. The moment you stop believing in that is the moment you cease to be special, by that definition.
Don't reject the wrong mantra. "You're special" is fine. "Special means you're better" is what causes you problems.
Sometimes it's OK to do less than your best, other times your best isn't good enough. Results are what matter, so figure out what result you want and accomplish it.
Even though I had a great time, got two great degrees and actually found a really good job in the City I cannot help but feel why I couldn't have gone straight to work skipped all this debt and invested even more money/time in other endeavours like getting solid operational experience in a company. For instance, my head of opts at my firm built the biggest mutual fund in the UK around the age of 20.
Sure, but not in an environment where "shoot the messenger" is the m.o. I learned to keep my head down pretty quickly, and now I'm looking for an exit strategy.
I hold firm to the belief that I can do anything I set my mind to--even if it means failing a few times.
Though in general I agree, we often overestimate the limits, that doesn't mean there are none, and I'd rather let the children explore than have a path set out for them before they're even teenagers.
I believe the only valuable advice you can give to someone is along the lines of "Do what you feel is the right thing for you to do."
Wait til it bursts, you can go back then when it's harder to find lucrative work.
It isn't that this is necessarily bad advice. It's just that it was bad advice for me.
Life is much better after you gather a few restraining orders.
Also, think about this: if people were mostly bad and that would mean they were getting worse and worse every next generation (because all the good ones were 'eaten' by the bad ones), how it'd have been right now? I think our world isn't THAT horrible!
Every time I did that things got messed up and I ended up worse than I was before.
If you're outside your comfort zone, you will act in non-authentic ways, and when you're not being authentic, you can't be the best possible you.
Examples of stepping outside comfort zone:
* Wear a suite and act professional for a job interview
* Say hi to random strangers so you can make friends (even though you're introverted and doing this makes you look like a fool)
* Go to social events where you don't know anyone there.
EDIT: thanks for the down votes. Now let me explain why this is bad advice:
- Act not like yourself for a job interview:
This is bad because instead of showing them your strong points, you'll be busy trying to hide your weak points and seem like a "good, obedient" employee. Eventually you fail at both: your bad points will still show, while your good points won't get a chance.
- Begging friendship from random strangers:
Makes you look like a fool, insecure person that nobody wants to be friends with.
EDIT2: I'm not talking about little steps. Venturing into new areas is fun. Throwing yourself into the middle of an extremely uncomfortable situation is completely different.
One of the reasons I found "step outside your comfort zone" to be bad advice is that they never tell you how far to go and when you should stop. It seems consequential that you never know when you have gone too far, because you're outside the zone where you can use your intuition sensibly. If you were able to tell that you've gone too far, then by definition you're still inside your comfort zone.
If something only makes you a little bit uncomfortable, it will feel like it's still inside your comfort zone, and if you're trying to follow the "step outside your comfort zone" advice, you'll be tempted to go even further.
It's not a good idea to pick up skydiving when you're in a burning plane and it's the only option.
Well, if it's the only option apart from dying in a plane crash, I'd argue it's a very good idea.
-public speaking
-asking women out
-learning to dance
-socializing/making friends
-lifting weights
-starting a business
-doing sales work
-learning to program
edit: The vast majority of these made me very uncomfortable and awkard, not "a little".
I made myself go back to university when my first experience was not successful, I'm now on track for a great degree. I am in the process of chasing a few business opportunities, and I'm putting myself in the position of a marketing man. This has already lead to some promising leads. I also tried to be a bit more open minded and non-judgemental, and socialise in ways I didn't previously, and I made some great friends as a result.
Your life is in many ways, very much in your own hands.
I view my "self" as fluid, and whatever I want me to be.
You're not supposed to be awkward and uncomfortable just for the hell of it.
Pushing ourselves beyond the comfort zone most likely reveal ugly truth about ourselves that our ego have been trying to protect ourselves from. I found that what I thought were world's injustices directed at me were really my own insecurities and sheer laziness; or my notion that I'm a nice and considerate person is really sour grapes that I didn't have X; and in the position of getting X, I could be as selfish and manipulative as the next guy who has X, whom I previously vilified. Stepping out of comfort zone reveals who we really are and sometimes the truth is ugly.
In all of these things, you strike a balance and find what is moral or healthy--that is part of the journey. I wouldn't want to use possible straw-men morality as an excuse for continued ineptness. Like white hat security pros, you can know how to do something but choose not to do it.
No, I haven't completely achieved all of my goals although I have gone very far in all of them. But I'm not as anxious about them nor about admitting on my shortcomings on my goals in public; like in programming, at a point you develop a sense of confidence that even on a long programming project, it's only a matter a time that you will finish it. It's just a sequence of iterations of coding & debugging.
How did programming affect my life? It made me a nerd with inferiority-superiority complex who on one hand views average human beings as automatons who let their sense of social insecurity get in their way; and who on the other hand is insecure himself, requires constant social re-assurances, stroking of the ego and (most importantly) sexual gratification. And for that, I'm eternally indebted to programming.
I am quite introverted but whenever I force myself to go to a social event where I don't know anyone and make friends, I always have a great time and meet awesome people, and it invariably goes better than I thought it would. If you just assume the people there WANT to be your friend, you don't look needy and your extroverted side comes out, and you can still be yourself.
"Introverts are perfectly capable of overcoming their personality tendencies."
The first thing you're assuming is that introverts either want or need to overcome their introversion. There isn't anything wrong with being an introvert. There is something wrong with being an extreme introvert.
I certainly did not mean to say that. I don't believe it. What I said was that introverts are capable of overcoming their tendencies. They're tendencies, not fate.
The commenter a few levels above said they had a great time at parties; the comment I responded to said that sounded like a shy extrovert. Not so, say I: introverts can have fun at parties too, even ones where they don't know anybody.
No value judgement intended in any direction. I'm a strong introvert who does well at parties because I need to for my work; but it's difficult and I don't have fun.
I think the person above was pointing out that by saying that introverts need to "overcome" their tendencies, you are effectively saying that introverts have an issue that needs to be overcome.
I just moved overseas to a new university and I've been forcing myself to go to many, many talks and chat with the people there. Some huge proportion of time I walk away with some useful bit of information "You have to read the new paper by x! It covers exactly what you're looking for." or "Y just got a grant and is looking for PhD students in your area."
Every connection you make adds potential access to another life times experience and knowledge.
[I'm vaguely expecting you to weasle word "Ah, but not doing that is being an /extreme/ introvert."]
We did a teamwork exercise where they split the E's and I's. To both groups, they said that you have the next day off - tell us what you're going to do. The E's were going nuts with chartering a plane to Vegas, big party while all of the I's were going to do something alone, maybe even just catch up on laundry. The difference was shocking.
In another exercise, they had an E monitor a team of us I's on a logic puzzle. As the E later described, he was just basically watching us I's sit there and not say anything and then a few minutes later - we started talking. We won but the non-talking communication really weirded him out.
Sadly, I believe most introverts are pretty selfish - worrying what other people think of them when, in reality, most everyone is not thinking of them - and may not even notice them.
Another thing about Introverts - with most extroverts, it is fairly easy to figure out who a person is or at least who they primarily represent themselves as. With an introvert, a stranger is going to have to invest a lot more in getting to know who an introvert is - that's exhausting to some people - why expend energy figuring out the quiet ones when you can have fun talking to the loud ones.
WTF? :-)
Did that come out wrong? Are you a non-native English speaker and don't know the word "selfish"?
That kind of worrying is normal insecurity. If you up the ante with e.g. unusual clothes, non-introvert people wills start worrying like that too. Introverts just start doing it at a lower threshold.
Say hi to random strangers so you can make friends (even though you're introverted and doing this makes you look like a fool)
Go to social events where you don't know anyone there.
I don't see that as a corollary (a city is not a social event). But for me personally, that's right, I wouldn't do that unless I had an extroverted friend or family moving with me, or I had something specific to do (job, study, etc). Although I wouldn't necessarily suggest that to other people; this is just me, and each to his own.
Instead, I'd suggest "Know the culture that you're entering, respect it, and do your best to adhere to it."
But, by and large, I agree with your suggestion. If that cultural fit is a bad one, it's best to skip it.
When I interviewed for my current job, it was at a company where I knew a lot of people and was pretty familiar with th culture. I knew a jacket and tie would be overkill but it seemed respectful overkill. A suit would have been way overboard though I'd be surprised had anyone really dinged me for it. There is a matter of understanding norms but, usually at least, a degree of overdressing for interviews seems a reasonable approach.
After several experiences delivering talks or sitting on panel discussions, I've gotten a lot more comfortable - and progressively better (I truly feel sorry for the people who had to sit through my first few times).
I'm still not great at it, but the thought of speaking no longer grips me with panic. The last couple of times I even found myself enjoying it - and feeling a positive response from my audience.
I'm reminded of an essay by Derek Sivers that was posted to HN last year: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1434064
> After 15 years of practice, and about 1000 live shows, I was finally a very good singer, at least by my own standards. (You can judge for yourself at sivers.org/music. Old stuff at the bottom. New stuff at the top.)
> Someone who heard me for the first time then said, “Singing is a gift you're either born with or you're not. You're lucky. You were born with it!”
If you are so introverted that you can't possibly go to an event without making a complete fool out of yourself (a real fool, not just what you think is foolish) you've got a serious issue that is going to put you at a disadvantage in many areas of your life.
There's a huge gap between having faults, recognizing them, accepting them and overcoming them when you choose to and being perfect in every way.
I don't see how completely ignoring your weak points and pretending they aren't relevant to you makes you a better person, however.
Genuinely curious: are you saying this as a matter or philosophy or did you try this and come out of it feeling foolish and insecure? Or may be both?
I won't down vote you because I think I can relate to both sides of this. There are things I was never into that I got into after a lot of struggles and looking foolish. And there are things that I was never into that I could never feel comfortable with no matter how much I tried.
In either case, until I got out of my comfort zone I could never know what I can and cannot eventually be.
Every time I've tried stepping out of my comfort zone "just for the hell of it", it usually ends up being pointless at best and embarrassing at worst. I'm not changed at all, I don't really accomplish anything besides making myself feel uncomfortable, and nothing much comes of it.
But the really big, life-changing events in my life have all come from stepping outside my comfort zone, and staying outside my comfort zone until I became comfortable. Switching school districts for high school. Going away for college. Posting things on the Internet. Rocking the job interview process. Founding a company, and sticking with it until everyone except me had given up. Moving to Silicon Valley.
I feel like this is often misunderstood, that a lot of people step outside their comfort zone simply because that's what they're told to do, and don't follow through with it enough to reap the rewards.
No it isn't. The point of stepping outside your comfort zone is to see if it really does belong outside your comfort zone. Stepping outside your comfort zone and demanding that that be the new way, results be damned, is just as foolish as never stepping outside your comfort zone. Not everything outside your comfort zone is good and usually the only way to determine what is and isn't good is to jump in and try it out.
That's kinda worse. The only good way to venture into new areas, in my opinion, is to make little steps forward, to the extent that you're not standing still "as-is" but also while you're still in control of your emotions.
This will expand your comfort zone gradually until the thing that was originally very uncomfortable, is now only slightly uncomfortable.
But going completely outside your zone over and over again? No thanks. This might work for some people, specifically people with SP temperament (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artisan_temperament) who tend to seek stimulation, but it's not a good advice for the general population.
It worked because I pretty much made it the focus of my life to adjust to my new situation. Yes, it was scary. It was also a huge opportunity, and I wasn't going to pass it up.
If the idea of a big change completely fills you with dread, you shouldn't do it. That's my point - you should either go all-in or not-at-all-in. But if it's only a little scary, and you think you can do it, my experience has been that it's almost always better to do it and keep at it until it's no longer scary.
1. Take "temperament theory" with a grain of salt. It's somewhat in vogue right now with a lot of psychologists, but there are also plenty of reasons to think that it's conflating two separate issues (temperament and typology) and is an oversimplification.
2. The only way to develop your personality is to step outside your comfort zone. Your type only determines where that comfort zone is, not whether you can or should do it often. For SP (really more ESP, but whatever) types, doing crazy things physically is their comfort zone. They need to learn to get in touch with their more subdued side.
There's a world of difference between choosing to step outside your limits because you've identified something that you aspire to, and doing so because someone else thinks they know what's good for you.
i should also mention that peirce died a penniless drunk, after leading a tumultuous (huge understatement) life, including a lecturing at harvard.
it's interesting and a little sobering to see how fucked up the lives of many dedicated scholars end up being.
That being said, your points are valid depending on what you are used to. The social event where you know no one is a natural step after you learn to mingle with strangers alongside friends; if you haven't done that at least, the event will probably suck.
I've been reading some of the arguments and counterarguments. It seems like a lot of assumptions are being made on both sides. I raised two special needs kids and found that you can help someone grow into doing things they could not before without forcing them to step outside their comfort zone. I now have a job and I find that similar principles work with "normal" adults who need to do something new and aren't sure what they are supposed to be doing.
At home with my oldest son, I had him watch me cook while I explained. Later, he began assisting -- getting out ingredients I needed, stirring things, etc. but only doing what he felt comfortable with. He gradually took over more parts of it as he became comfortable. He now does most of the cooking. At work, I have volunteered to walk someone to where they need to go for a special procedure and show them whom they needed to speak with. One young woman was very shy, so I did intros and did the initial talking until she was more comfortable with this new person. Just walking a new person through the procedure the first time really took the pressure off. It's a big building and everything looks alike and it's easy to get lost, plus my job has a lot of time pressure which adds to the psychological stress because getting lost and wandering around costs you time.
If you don't have someone that can help walk you through something (or some other means to ramp up comfortably), it may be best to take some personal risks. But it is absolutely possible to grow as a person without doing stuff that makes you feel all stressed primarily because it is extremely unfamiliar. Some things may require taking a leap of faith but many things that are routinely handled that way do not inherently require that approach. (I could argue that Y-combinator does something similar to what I am suggesting here: They take you under their wing, introduce you to a lot of folks who already have experience founding a company, help you work out the kinks, etc. so you don't have to simply sink or swim/figure it out all on your own/grow from being burned so much.)
As long as you've made something that a few users are ecstatic about, you're on the right track. ... It may take a while, but as long as you keep plugging away, you'll win in the end.
That's not realllllllly how it works in the valley.
I had a major passion for it at the time (pre college) and had I taken this advice from everyone in my family, I would probably be working in McDonalds at this point.