Harsh Truths That Will Make You a Better Person
cracked.com
cracked.com
“I don’t really think there is a deep down. I think we are just the things we do.”
That line really resonated with me. It stings, but it also motivates. I think if more people recognized it, they might do more good things (and/or stop being so hard on themselves if they’re already in the habit of doing good things).
Where it oversimplifies reality, just for a few examples:
What about cases where people take credit for what others do?
What about when people prevent others from doing things, so as to create artificial scarcity?
Are others really knowledgeable about the long-term value of something to themselves? Are actors rational?
Just for instance: all of the characters in that Glengarry Glen Ross scene are white. What if that character decided blacks are worthless because no one wants to do business with a black person? Do we just passively shrug and say that's reasonable, if true? What about the long-term consequences of a workplace environment like the one in the film? Is there another way of doing it? What about the higher-order value of sales benefiting that company?
I think there's a certain false wisdom about the perspective of the article that rings hollow to me at this stage. Like, it's not just cold or harsh, but false.
Not too long ago there was an article posted here at HN about a sort of bias to see cynicism as intelligent, and I guess I see this as part of that pattern. I've met too many people in my life that justify rewarded narrowmindedness, bigotry, incompetence, or psychopathy in terms of "how life is". Maybe at some level that's true but to me it leads to a certain psychopathic brand of meaningless tautology in which we're all either swindlers or marks.
Later in the piece the author discusses how feelings can be the motivator for doing good things, but the doing is the part that really matters.
Also, whether it intended it or not it is now definitely a de facto endorsement of workplace abuse.
Your SO might, except when it starts impacting what you produce, as that is who you really are to them. Feeling bad about everyone who you kill does not stop you being a serial killer
Moreover, the whole point of anything happening deep down, is that it results in us doing something.
It's not true of course; there's no soul and no real true self that's separate from the things you do. You just are your memories and the things you do. You might take a vacation and find some new hobby you like doing, but that's not because it's part of your true self.
> The World Only Cares About What It Can Get from You
> What You Produce Does Not Have to Make Money, But It Does Have to Benefit People
I think these are conflicting…
> What You Are Inside Only Matters Because of What It Makes You Do
This one's true though.
> This one's true though
No, it's also false. The only reason you do anything is to feel a certain way. If being or believing you are X makes you feel what you want, then mission accompolished. What you are on the inside is the only thing that can matter to you, whether it requires action to accomplish or not.
(That's why if you're going to read some online guy's made up philosophy blog, it should be meaningness.com.)
for me the whole purpose of life is to make a positive contribution to society. that can take many forms
You will see it in the way he describes working together to meet basic needs at the end of point 6. He says society is a system for meeting needs. The world presents a set of problems and society presents a set of solutions through it's behavioral demands.
The rest of the article is just him rationalizing the demands and the repercussions of not meeting them but the underlying assertions he is making are these:
That humans are not a part of the world. They are just in it and afflicted by the requirements of being there. That society is a social technology which partitions us off and functions to preserve us therein. Therefore any demands it makes or repercussions it inflicts are legitimate and bound up with your survival and that the sooner you get on board, the sooner you will be "a better person".
Another dead give away is the fact that "better" is a completely subjective evaluation, but he kind of buries the lede on that one and goes on to talk about "society" in the singular, probably knowing full well that the reader will just project their own subjective definition.
Oh yeah, every cute girl is going to come up with AGI or become a surgeon it's only the guys that are worthless and bringing nothing to the table. The girl in the bookstore loves handsome men and she barely cares about his GPA. This idea that women see right through you needs to die. It's mostly about looks.
"Who is THIS guy to tell ME how to live? Oh, like he's so high and mighty! It's just some dumb writer on the Internet! I'm going to go dig up something on him that reassures me that he's stupid, and that everything he's saying is stupid! This guy is so pretentious, it makes me puke!"
He’s also saying that good looks/being cute take effort.
Do you save the environment? Or do you sell people cars (which ultimately destroy the environment and create toxic waste) under the guise of "saving the environment"?
Do you act like you're a lion that really cares about gazelle lives being protected?
This is the conflict of selflessness we are constantly presented with.
There is a way to succeed while living well and not being a total douchebag, especially if you can ignore the fact that many won't like you, that you won't have extreme wealth, and that you may never become famous... It's a much better way to live if you are indeed a "spiritual" or somewhat ethical person.
The apex/alpha mentality is very toxic and destructive. Even though many people adore it and exalt this brand of selfish/egotistical bad behavior, the damage it does to society and others far exceeds it's benefits in material gains. Material things only have temporary value, your soul (or legacy if you're not spiritual) however can potentially infinite value to others. My recommendation is for people to keep those 2 aspects in balance... That way you won't have to ask for forgiveness or regret your life on your death bed.
You can generalize this to the whole population. Average people, ambitious, criminals, murderers, rapists they all think they are good people. And they aren't better than the religious people on which you focus.
I am dead because I lack desire,
I lack desire because I think I possess,
I think I possess because I do not try to give,
In trying to give, you see that you have nothing,
Seeing that you have nothing, you try to give of yourself,
Trying to give of yourself, you see that you are nothing,
Seeing that you are nothing, you desire to become,
In desiring to become, you begin to live.
"No utopia can ever give satisfaction to everyone, all the time. As their material conditions improve, men raise their sights and become discontented with power and possessions that once would have seemed beyond their wildest dreams. And even when the external world has granted all it can, there still remain the searchings of the mind and the longings of the heart."
A century ago "harsh truths" pushed child laborers into mines and mills. Those whose minds are searching and hearts are longing also need intangible benefits for which "What You Are Inside" very very much matters, despite the reality tunnel of the Cracked Philosopher. Great parents and teachers know this.
"For instance, some people want to respond to that speech with Tyler Durden's line from Fight Club: "You are not your job."
But, well, actually, you totally are. Granted, your "job" and your means of employment might not be the same thing, but in both cases, you are nothing more than the sum total of your useful skills. For instance, being a good mother is a job that requires a skill. It's something a person can do that is useful to other members of society. But make no mistake: Your "job" -- the useful thing you do for other people -- is all you are... Tyler said, "You are not your job," but he also founded and ran a successful soap company and became the head of an international social and political movement. He was totally his job."
Alice: Hello Bob, nice to meet you. What do you do?
Bob: I'm a GoNodeRust programmer at StillCompiling Co. Nice to meet you too. What do you do?
Alice: I knit these jumpers for friends. I go jogging twice a week and I'm 3rd dan in karate. I self publish romance stories. I volunteer at a charity shop on Tuesdays. I'm reading "Pride and Prejudice" for the 19th time and I'm half way through. I'm restoring an old chair I found in an op-shop.
Bob: No really, what do you do?
The things Alice does are part of who she is, and how she defines herself: she does things for friends. She writes. She reads. She's practical and does stuff with her hands.
Alice's job is a 4-day a week receptionist at BoringAccountingFirm Inc. She's good at her job, and it keeps the lights on, and food on the table ... But to answer the question "What do you do?" or even "Who are you?" with your job is often selling yourself very short.
In your example, Alice knows how to knit, do karate, write, work out, work in a shop, wood restoration, and be a receptionist. Bob may have have other skills but polite conversation ain't one of them.
It's ok for people to really be attached to their job if that's what they want. Most jobs require useful skills that people work hard to attain. Alice's identity is still made up of things she does or can do.
Anyone remember what the video was back when it used to work?