Hacker News Reader

Comment by holografix | Hacker News Reader

Warning: this post is a generalisation that could offend some people. I’m writing it because I feel I have to.

This reads _very_ American. By that I mean both a good and, more so than ever in 2020, a bad thing.

The good is obviously the undying optimism, self belief resilience and competitiveness I see displayed in the American way of life so often.

The bad is how it lays the responsibility for outcomes solely at the individual’s feet. “Not terribly successful? Stop blaming your kids, your marriage, it’s YOUR fault, you’re the one not doing enough”.

When does society get a share of the blame? When do you stop playing a game that’s rigged against you? Do you forever keep doing _more_ reducing yourself to a life of penitence and toil to be “exceptional”? This black or white, if I’m not a winner I’m a loser mentality is terribly unhealthy to the individual, society and frankly, to other nations.

View on HN

This is definitely a fair critique, and as I myself am _very_ American, I feel I should respond, if only to understand better myself.

> The bad is how it lays the responsibility for outcomes solely at the individual’s feet.

I’m curious: shouldn’t a manual for self improvement emphasize individual responsibility? Granted, it would be a terrible way to evaluate outcomes. But that’s not the goal here. The goal is to be individually exceptional.

> Do you forever keep doing _more_ reducing yourself to a life of penitence and toil to be “exceptional”?

This seems like a bit of an exaggeration. The article doesn’t advocate a narrow, singular focus on these 3 traits. That would be terrible advice (even if the goal is to emulate Ms. Buffet, for example). Of course there are reasonable limits. Who said otherwise?

> When do you stop playing a game that’s rigged against you?

“Relentlessly solution driven” in fact requires this, no? If you can’t win because it’s rigged, change the game.

The bit that bothers me, I guess, is that it seems so easy to give up on hard things if you don’t believe the bits the article states. I know many smart people who can’t ignore things they can’t control - and it makes them unhappy. I know others who struggle to focus on solutions rather than blame - and it makes them unhappy too. Why do these traits, in moderation, make Society worse?

Hey curiousllama, I think you bring up very valid points. A few other posters have brought up one or two arguments that have some overlap so let me try to clarify where I’m coming from and post a useful response.

I don’t advocate that the individual shouldn’t bear the brunt of the responsibility. I’m trying to say that the responsibility should be _shared_ by society.

I see how the main goal of the book is indeed to focus on the individual and their drive to being “exceptional”. So for people who find themselves dissatisfied with their comfortable mediocrity, so to say, I can imagine there is some value here in solving problems and removing obstacles.

Finally, what I’m trying to say is: I think this concept can and is applied very generally to a large population that find themselves, at the individual level, at drastically different positions in the hierarchy of needs. What roadblocks are you powering through when you might not have shelter or food? When you feel unsafe? Should we dismiss those individuals’ “excuses”.

That’s what I meant by very American. The example of Ms B. Who is clearly a one in a million type success story. Should we really bother dismissing every other pressure around us because someone was somehow able to do it? We’re her children happy and healthy? Did her marriage survive? Should we all strive to be Ms B, costs what it costs, regardless of food, shelter, security, health etc.

I've been thinking about this problem a bit too, this distinction between individual and collective responsibility. Here's what I've arrived at so far:

First, you have to have your own definition of success. Not everyone wants to be a rich entrepreneur with a million side hustles. Don't fall for the implicit message writers like this promote that you are a loser if you haven't built a multi-million dollar business from scratch. Identify your own goals and what makes you happy and work towards that even if its not in line with what pop leadership articles like this promote.

Second, forgive me for re-stating what this post already said, but focus on what you can control. This is where individual responsibility is important. Not only will you be more effective, but you'll be happier.

Third, you should make efforts that are within your control to improve structures and institutions that are making it easier for some people and harder for others. I would argue there is a moral imperative on those of us who are the beneficiaries of these systems to put extra focus here. Vote every chance you get. Donate time and money to organizations pushing for systemic change. Find opportunities to make the world a more equal place and act on them.

We do live in a society where we are constantly bombarded to do more, learn more, be better. The cost of this though is a reduction in family time, personal time and just me time. In many organizations, in order to retain your position you have to continuously improve your skill set, there is no room anymore for just getting a job, working a 9 - 5, going home to be happy and to see your family and then retiring with a solid retirement after.

Its just a constant hamster wheel where we are desperate just to survive. Every year benefits cost more and provide for less. Every dollar you earn buys a little bit less. Houses cost a little bit more. Economically every 10 years now there is a massive event that spurs massive layoffs where everyone that was just doing their job is let go and only the elite remain. Those that are let go are forced to step down the totem pole and take jobs that provide a salary that leads to a reduction in security.

Life now seems to just be about work and work just seems to be about squeezing every hour and dollar out of you until someone younger and hungrier comes along to take your place and be bled by the system. I don't think that this is the way its supposed to be.

I didn't read any of that in this article. Maybe the not accepting excuses point?

One type of leader I've encountered in my career is the one who won't accept accept excuses. "If you can't do it, I'll get someone who can." It's not personal, it's a business.

Another type of leader I've encountered is one who builds the team up and accepts the occasional failure, knowing that in the long run there may be more wins because the team will grow professionally.

Personally, as a leader I find myself more in the second group. However, both are really equally valid, in the long run--in that they have an equal chance to achieve business goals.

How are the other two points (Don't languish in what you can't change, look for a solution in every failure) an "American" viewpoint?

> When does society get a share of the blame?

Blaming society and sitting back is counterproductive. Blaming society and taking agency with respect to that injustice is a productive, performing response. (As is trying to “tough through” the adversity, as unlikely as that is to succeed.)

At the individual level, focussing on elements one has control over is a sensible strategy. At the society-wide level, the discussion must be more complex.

> Blaming society and sitting back is counterproductive. Blaming society and taking agency with respect to that injustice is a productive, performing response. (As is trying to “tough through” the adversity, as unlikely as that is to succeed.)

> At the individual level, focussing on elements one has control over is a sensible strategy. At the society-wide level, the discussion must be more complex.

It's a recipe for beating-oneself-up misery for most people, though.

It's all a bit zero-sum, right? Anything "exceptional" stops being exceptional when everyone thinks the secret to doing better than others is to do those things.

You'll never have a world where any individual can simply "go make themselves exceptional" because exceptional is by definition the exception.

This works out ok for the people who happen to have the right conjunction of exceptional ability and market demand for that sort of skill.

But the people preaching this stuff are much more commonly the ones sitting where they are by fortuitousness or historical accident, who greatly benefit if the "other people" believe it's their own fault they're stuck in a constantly-intensifying rat-race (over the last 5 decades or so).

There's no danger of everyone being exceptional though, given human nature, which is essentially the point. Normal emotional defensive mechanisms such as making excuses and avoiding confrontation impede your long term goals. Trying and failing "hurts" more than not trying at all, so there's a self-defeating optimization process being performed by people typically. Of course your own mind isn't the only obstacle holding you back, but it can be a big one. I agree this kind of fluff is off-putting for technical-minded people, but the value of the point seems pretty clear.

As for the anecdotes and success stories, I also agree they are not convincing. In business they can be very useful though, since starting a new venture requires a lot of leaps of faith and uneducated decisions, something paralyzing to most people. Having a model for how others proceeded is very valuable.

Your points here are exactly why I am no longer religious.

Also, if you are easily offended, I'd skip the rest of this, I do not want to offend anyone, these are my opinions alone.

If you worship any God, then you can never be as good as your God. You can never be #1 even after you die. The whole framework sets you up for a life of the inability to win. You are at BEST going to be #2 because you can never ever be #1. Every religious person who worships a God is going to feel like they are a loser; because they are not and never will be #1 a 'winner'. It is exhausting.

I have not had a good experience with Christians in my everyday life. I'm sorry to say that, but when I meet someone and they tell me they are Christian; I immediately become suspicious of them. I have learned this from many, many interactions.

I think it has something to do with comparing yourself to God. "I am not #1. Sometimes I am close to #1 and sometimes I am very far from #1. When I am far from #1, maybe I steal a little or lie a little. I know I can get closer to #1 later and be forgiven (by the true #1)."

It's a sliding scale. There's no permanence.

They only way to win that game is to not play. Once you realize that not only are you already #1 there is no #2. You are responsible for you. That means you live exactly by your own personal values. For me it means I never lie or steal and that decision is not based on how I feel about myself!

I have a friend who is a Buddhist monk. We were talking about emotions recently and she said something I now think about every day: "You can't control your emotions. Don't even try, they are far too powerful. You can only control your BEHAVIOR."

I am in control of me. Nothing else is in control of me, not even my own emotions. And since I am in control of me, who else is to blame if my life is not working out?

That's not American my friend, that wisdom is ancient.

What exactly does being #1 mean? Being #1 at what exactly? Running? Singing? Wealth? Everything?

Well that depends on your value system. If you define your own value system, you decide where you are. If you get a value system from someone or something else: they decide.

Please give me a quick concrete example. What is your value system, and how are you #1 in it?

Sure. For example: I value honesty and hard work. If I am honest and am working hard I am living with integrity.

Thanks. Are you #1 in honesty? Are you #1 in hard work? From what I understand, you do not believe in a God because believing in one means you will never be #1 in honesty or #1 in hard work, and it is your goal to be #1 in them.

It's a strange way of looking at things, because you cannot really measure being the worlds most honest person, unless you meet and test all the 7 billion people alive today, and how exactly will that test be conducted? And since we're not restricting being #1 to human beings (God is not human), how about ants? I'd say an ant is more hardworking than any human being alive, so none of us will ever be #1 at hard work. Whats so wrong with being #2 at hard work? Or even #8888,888,888,000 at hard work? I doubt I am #1 in anything I value (independence, knowledge etc) but it does not matter at all. The opposite infact, seeing people better than me in things I value only inspires me to greater heights.

You are not in control of you though. You are at best a little boat on the governmental, legal and economic ocean; and those waters are full of monsters.

That's right. I can not control anything at all except my own behavior. Exactly right.

I respect your opinion - it's hard to put those out there.

As a counter thought, would a 'hole' in the argument be that religion doesn't ask, require, or expect you to be #1. It just asks you to try to improve and to become a better person. How could Gd expect you to be as good as "he/she/it/they"? Gd would have created you, and designed your limitations.

Why not separate G*d's expectations of you from your interpretations of it? Just say "i'm falliable, always will be; always improving, always will be"

Thank you for your comment, yes it is hard.

So what you are saying is God built failure into me intentionally. Therefore I could just point to that and say "Well I failed because I was prebuilt knowing I was going to fail". I don't accept that. I say "I failed because of something I, personally did not or could not do yet. I will correct that. It's not divine, it's just work and it's on me."

Depends on your branch. Calvinism claimed there were only 1300 Elect who were guaranteed a place in heaven. Lot of effort spent trying to figure out your ranking

I did not know that. 1300? That is quite a specific, but round number. 1028 would have been really cool!

You're not necessarily meant to compete with a being conceived as omnipotent, omni-powerful and creator of the universe.

I'd be wary of american churches too, given the role religion plays in american culture.

It's not the competion that matters, not even playing against or defeating the #1 tennis player. Think of it as a tennis point being played. If both you and #1 play the point perfectly, a beautiful play that will remain in tennis history and create a sense of wonder in many people that watch that point, it does not even matter if you win or lose the point, what truly matters is being part of something great, greater than yourself, greater than the current #1 in the tennis. But to be able to do that, it requires a lot of work, a lot of dedication, and a mindset of playing for the game's sake, playing to feel good and have fun and make other people feel good watching, not trying to win a competition. Also, it doesn't mean that the point could not be played in a different way which is also perfect and beautiful in its own, so other people could potentially play that point and that doesn't mean they're lesser players that you, and it doesn't mean that somebody who can win all points and matches is also playing the most beautiful tennis ever.

You've described the hero's journey but I don't see how it applies to the context of this thread? Is your point; that the metaphor for something greater than yourself is an adequate replacement for religion or something?

Why can't I be better than God? Interpersonal comparisons are never particularly healthy, but I don't see how he would always come out on top. He had questionable design aesthetics sometimes, to say nothing of the often deadly implementation bugs. And that's not even getting into the choice to build things in his system that can be used for terrible, immoral purposes.

Your whole post is extremely American. Why do you want to be #1 compared to anyone, let alone compared to God? You are no longer religious because your self-centric world-view is incompatible with believing anyone can be better than you, which includes God? I have trouble believing you are serious.

You completely missed my point. Here: God doesn't exist, I'm in competition with myself only, I can't control the outcome or anyone or anything at all including my emotions, only my individual behavior.

I see. That makes more sense. That being said, you are still framing life as a competition/game which I'm not sure I see the point in. For what it's worth, I view religion mostly as a mechanism for encouraging behavior which is collectively beneficial. We are all better off if we act in ways that are trustworthy, even if that means individual sacrifice in some cases, and so the whole afterlife b.s. is just a way of suggesting a lifestyle which is pro-social. Case in point, even people who supposedly believe in paradise don't act like it.

I'd also like to amend my comment from "God doesn't exist" to "We don't know if God exists".

This one really threw me.

I'm often critical of religion myself, and find it all a bit baffling to be honest, but I feel like you've really misread believers here.

Surely the point of religion is not to compete with the divine, but to humble yourself in obeisance to it?

One example: "Islam means submission".

OK, so there are televangelists and muscular Christianity and so on, but they make up a small part, don't they?

This article was focused on business and used sports metaphors exclusively - these are fields in which the "American" approach works well because you're competing with other people with binary outcomes. Obviously this is not the best approach for science where the outcomes are less black and white.

Do you expect society to blame itself?

Surely radical individualism results in the individual blaming society at their whim. You stop playing a game that's rigged against you as soon as you can afford a plane ticket.

Where are these countries that will just lift the road up to meet your feet as you walk forward?

willingness to accept the truth has absolutely no bearing on what the truth actually is.

Well of all the generalizations used to describe americans nowadays this may be one of the nicest.

But I do have to say, as for blame, society gets eviscerated 24/7 on every public forum and other platform. Stories like this are more the exception, even here. For every professor publishing on "individual success" there may be 100 researching "group studies" of one kind or another.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com