Hacker News Reader

I guarantee that the person who wrote this article doesn't get jealous of Olympic Snowboarders (to use a contrived example). The jealousy comes from thinking that you are competing with other people for a limited pool of money/ideas/success.

When people start to realize that the pool isn't limited, and that you aren't actually competing with anyone else (except in certain circumstances), it's a lot more freeing. You can differentiate yourself, your product, or your startup along any lines, and you will be unique and extraordinary. The only thing that's left is finding other people who think that.

It's human to struggle with jealousy like this, but the competition isn't reality. It's all a social construct.

Participation trophies are not bullshit.

I think most damage to kids is done by people who claim participation trophies are bullshit.

These trophies are for encouraging people to try and do something and not thinking: "I am not going to win anyway so why bother trying at all".

Kids are smart and they also know that running that 5km run and finishing first is hard work. They might not be happy about participation trophy but still they should be praised for the effort of putting on shoes and trying.

There is a lot of psychology about effects of encouraging positive behaviors that is misunderstood. Even if you have employees it is much more effective to praise them on positive behaviors than scolding them for mistakes. Because scolding for mistakes will push them into direction "I am not going to do this task at all because if I make mistake I will get scolded, so why bother doing this task at all".

Participation trophies are 100% bullshit.

The reward you get is learning that hard work is its own reward.

> The reward you get is learning that hard work is its own reward.

Maybe for some people the internal feeling is good enough, for others, some token (however worthless you might think it is) works.

Why make people feel bad when its so easy to make them feel good?

Maybe because the goal isn't feeling good?

Found the boomer. You're right, the goal is to feel disappointed. Isn't that what your generation was about, "Disappointment builds character" and all that toxic nonsense?

often, that is literally the goal. and that’s ok.

> Why make people feel bad when its so easy to make them feel good?

Isn't the answer to this question point of the thread?

Participation trophies aren't just about tokens. Everyone who runs a race can get a shirt or something to show they were there. This kind of thing has always been around. Participation trophies are for protecting people from knowledge that there were winners and losers in a competition and that they are one of the losers.

I don't know who's getting that message from participation trophies, but I certainly understood winning and losing when I played organized sports as a kid.

When I did sports as a kid I constantly finished close to last. (Just had not one bit of talent and/or genetics)

I was very aware of that fact and nevertheless I went and participated. Mainly because my parents encouraged my personal progress and celebrated small victories and effort.

The particular sport I did also provided small tokens (usually a slightly "fancy" certificate, sometimes a cap or shirt or sth)

Did that help me become good at that particular sport? No not at all.

But the mindset of curiosity and going for your personal best even if others are better did help me later in live.

Preservation goes a long way and encouraging kids to do their best is not a bad thing. Keep it grounded in reality though ("You did good today, great process . Others will make that their career but you showed up and put in the work which is good by itself")

> Participation trophies are for protecting people from knowledge that there were winners and losers in a competition and that they are one of the losers.

Have you ever seen a participation trophy?

I have some from youth sports. They're a tenth the size of the actual placement trophies. They were not an attempt to fool people.

> They were not an attempt to fool people.

That's exactly what they are. The whole reason People started pushing them was to pursue an agenda to affect developmental psychology. Perhaps you are misreading my point, as are others who seem to equate not being a loser with first place. A third place trophy is not fooling anyone that the winner is equal to the first place winner either. Participation trophies allow children to accumulate a room full of trophies and praise from relatives.

If it's very clearly distinguished from placement trophies to everyone involved, then where's the deception?

I see you want to come over to my house next week and paint the walls.

Od course I am not paying anything because hard work is its own reward.

What? No!

I can just watch you paint the walls and get credit for just showing up.

This whole thing got me thinking about my time in Panama. It was a combat zone but we weren’t doing war stuff so didn’t get combat patches even though we qualified because the 82nd doesn’t give out participation trophies. Hell, they were talking about not giving us Combat Infantry Badges for the Gulf War even though we were running ops in Iraq before the ground war started because they all surrendered once it did. Though…I used to call my CIB “my participation trophy” when I was in the reserves years later.

Imagine painting somebody's walls and being given a participation trophy lol.

Actually the research suggests that participation trophies are counter-productive, because it teaches kids that they don’t need to try, they are simply entitled to rewards: https://lancasteronline.com/opinion/columnists/undeserved-pr...

The whole concept of participation trophies came out of the “self-esteem” movement, which has mostly panned out to be BS.

Participation trophies are not addressed in your link.

Well this article sure as hell isn't by a researcher.

The quotes from experts say that "too much" and "undeserved" praise is bad.

A participation trophy is generally very minor in terms of praise.

Much more specific expert quotes are needed here.

>Participation trophies are not bullshit.

I have two participation medals from international sporting competitions. I throw them in the trash after I get them.

I've kept the two bronze medals.

> A mentally healthy person, when shown a display of excellence, is impressed, energized, and motivated.

The way I’ve expressed this sentiment before in the context of music was to find hope when I hear outstanding musicians, as my thought was usually, “we now know there is at least one human capable of such expression, so it’s possible for us to reach this level,” or simply to say “such an individual does exist.”

I think the author has deeper seated issues to deal with, especially if they spend time languishing over this, and then writing these posts to justify/circumvent their negative emotional reactions by reframing and then echoing their internal troubles to the rest of us like we need to be enlightened.

I agree. I used to feel very jealous whenever hearing superior musicians, but after a while it just becomes exciting, especially when you're often playing with people within the same sphere of talent as you rather than binging YouTube videos of the best of the best.

The author does have deep-seated issues to deal with, but I really don't think the author is uniquely broken. I would bet that at least half of the modern western population struggles with similar feelings.

Yeah it’s a blight of origins I cannot comprehend, to be blunt. Upbringing? Harsh parents? Bullying? Whenever I do see it however it’s a self destructive force, and people who have directly expressed these feelings to me before often have another more sinister feeling to go with it, usually in the sphere of arrogance, contempt, malice, or some sort of righteous indignation that the world isn’t fair. Give these people the opportunity to cast others out, I’ve little hope they would hold themselves back from lashing out at those they perceive as “worse, but seen in more positive light” than them.

Seen as such, these articles do little to show the authors attempting to turn the other cheek as much as they try to justify and reframe their negativity.

My brother is in a band in the neighboring metro.

Each year they do a show at one of their houses, and the same core group of 6 or 7 guys shows up in different permutations in various acts. They also tend to bring in one or two "away team" bands as well. This year, they put on a show with a total of 8 acts.

Last year, when I went, I was in awe of what they'd built together. In a very punk DIY ethos kind of way, they've assembled their own little music fest. There were probably something like 60 people there through the night. Seeing these guys run through their music was so impressive to me. The level of technical skill and musicianship varies between the group, but none of them are what you'd think of as professional musicians. Some of the songs lack polish, or do awkward chord changes. There's plenty of sloppy guitar work. The vocalists are generally less than amazing.

But damn it, they're out there making music and sharing it with people. Don't like their stuff? Well, it's their house and their show!

In my own musicianship I've always been overly perfectionistic. How can these guys get up in front in random people and play these imperfect songs? And how can it be that the net result turns out to be the best show I've seen all year?

Because all of them care more about making music than being perfect at it. They'd rather be on stage with imperfect material than relegate their playing to the bedroom or garage trying to polish technique for no one.

I got the opportunity to jam with them after the show, and felt intimidated after having watched them all play. How was I going to stand up to these guys who just put together an entire concert?

But the thing is, I was able to hang with them. I was probably the worst player in the room, but I have enough skill to get up there and make music. It doesn't have to be perfect. We played the same chord for almost 20 minutes and the 6 people left in the crowd danced like we were the greatest show on earth

Sorry, this got long - but here's my point: Put yourself around people who do what you love. Don't worry about who's 'better' - there are so many dimensions that it's meaningless anyway.

The joy of life comes from going out into the world and playing your heart out whether you're great or terrible. I've been so much more inspired to play in the weeks since that show, and I hope to have some of my own imperfect original material to play next year.

> I think the author has deeper seated issues to deal with, especially if they spend time languishing over this, and then writing these posts to justify/circumvent their negative emotional reactions by reframing and then echoing their internal troubles to the rest of us like we need to be enlightened.

Seriously. It is loud and clear. The justification of their own pathological behavior is wildly unhealthy. Too bad they don't see a therapist.

> What actually hurt young people was the constant reinforcement that "anyone can do anything/anyone can be the best"

I think Ratatouille corrects this idea well - Not everyone can become a great artist, but a great artist can come from anywhere.

Perhaps it should be; everyone can be the best at something. You have to find your something.

On the whole though, the entire concept of “best” is a mess in a world of eight billion. At this point it’s more up to the whims of the contest, and doesn’t seem very correlated with life outcomes. Better by far to be one of the best, working shoulder to shoulder with the others, and forget entirely about who holds the podium.

Or “do not compare yourself with others, for there will always be greater and lesser persons than yourself.”

Doesn’t help when people like me are just terrible at everything, have accomplished nothing and considered subhuman by the rest of society!

This is a “thanks I’m cured” statement, no different from saying depressed people should smile more.

Legitimately though, the act of smiling whenever you can pull it off, will elevate mood. At times it isn’t possible. Similar with choosing instead of discovering what you can excel at and flow with.

The statement is in fact useless. Changing your mental actions is what is useful. When you notice you brain doing it, then imagine you are a kind kindergarten teacher guiding a child to take crayons out of his mouth. Kindly tell your brain to think of something else. Then patiently tell your brain again.

Put down the internet drama machine and go do small good things in the real world.

—————

> considered subhuman by the rest of society!

Unless you are literally an AI, then as a member of society I can tell you that this is factually inaccurate. I think you are a human.

I also know that there is a tiny fraction of society that consider me subhuman. HP Lovecraft would be horrified by my very existence. The fraction of society that calls people subhuman is really bad at maintaining healthy relationships and so they don’t tend to hold onto power so I don’t care about them.

> just terrible at everything and have accomplished nothing

Do you have solid evidence that this is factually accurate, or does it only feel true?

If it feels true, then get up and go for a walk or roll outside, occasionally doing pushups or waving your arms about. That will help you see reality more clearly.

Also, teach yourself how to make scrambled eggs well. That way when you remember the parts of your life that do suck, you’ll at least be able to remind yourself of your ability to make scrambled eggs for someone.

>Perhaps it should be; everyone can be the best at something. You have to find your something.

What happens if you don't? What do you tell someone who managed to find something at which they are respectably competent, but not the best? Is that not sufficient?

I think the real and maybe not directly stated point is that every person on a planet with billions of people is virtually guaranteed not to be the best at something. It is statistically unlikely especially given how we do everything we can to label people into groups and funnel them accordingly to be used ( and be useful to ) by society.

That does not mean that a given person should not try to get better, because this is the only way you will start getting to a level of competency and maybe, with some additional luck and push, to a top performer level. Not everyone can be number one, but extraordinary ( the attached article ) definition allows for that. And being second best at 'whatever' sure beats just complaining about everything you did not get a chance to accomplish.

<< Is that not sufficient?

I honestly don't know. It is a very personal question each of us should answer internally. I, personally, want to do better and you do want to keep giving yourself progressively harder goals. I am currently working on a plan for 23-25 and I am getting kinda excited, because I believe it will move me to a better place in terms of my career ( and by extension better family life ) and interests, but I know it will require some buckling down and really polishing some skills. Maybe it is spending too much time on HN watching other people's 'Show HN' threads that got me to question myself "Why can't I do this?/"What is missing?"

I already know I can't be best. As mentioned in the very fist paragraph I do not believe it is even possible, but I still think there is a lot of untapped potential. Wasting it would be a shame.

But this isn't true. Who is it benefitting to lie to people like this?

I mean, I’m definitely not the best songwriter out there but I’m definitely the best at writing songs about my own life!

Oh so we're just teaching people effective coping mechanisms? I guess that's fine I misunderstood the comment I was responding to i think

edit: also probably untrue, I bet there are lots of songwriters who could make songs about your life that the vast majority of people would agree are better than yours

Effective coping mechanisms that are reasonably grounded in objective reality.

Whose decision is it that the other songwriters are better at expressing this one dude’s experiences? Thats not an objective question. It is a choice.

No, it's not a choice. It's mostly subjective and up to them to judge, but it's a judgement based on the merits.

Writing is hard, and there are very good reasons people work with experts to make things about themselves.

Related, have you ever seen this clip? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4Y6zimxi-Q

Hmmm… okay you are making the distinction between judgement and discretion and saying I’m wrong to categorize this as discretion.

Upon reflection, I think you are right.

> writing is hard

Oh definitely. I’ve certainly had the experience of Lin-Manuel Miranda expressing something more clearly than I can.

A buddy of mine is definitely a better songwriter than I am and he has in fact written a song about me!

It would have been sometime in the late 2000s and I was visiting dear old dad in Christchurch, NZ, and my buddy James, aka Lawrence Arabia was playing a gig at the Wonderbar in nearby Littleton on Christmas Eve. I happened to meet a nice young lady, shit you not, named Eve, and we ended back at her place… her parent’s place. At 2am on Christmas Eve. Then her dad comes down and finds us fooling around on the couch in front of the tree. My ride had left hours ago so I had to call up pops. Surprisingly he was very pleased with my escapades and not too bothered with the wake up call.

Here’s James’s take on the event: https://fabulousarabia.bandcamp.com/track/give-me-love-tonig...

While it’s a fine song, it is definitely not his best, and I’m sure he’d admit that it is not as good as my better ones!

It is, however, better than my song about that night: https://williamcotton.bandcamp.com/track/eve-of-eve

My wife and I, complete strangers beforehand, were two of maybe 15 people who went to see James play at a small bar in SF about ten years ago. That dude has been getting me laid for decades!

Anyways, unless I happen to steal a steam engine high on cocaine or some other act of epic folklore there’s no chance in hell that some songwriter out there is ever going to write a better song about my life than yours truly.

If it somehow happened it would be an amazing honor.

You obviously wrote this whole story to brag about your success with women. I expect "I got laid" posts on Reddit, not on HN.

I'm sorry, but what is obvious here is that you have some insecurities around success with women.

Let's follow the thread. We have an article about learning to be OK with not being extraordinary. We have a comment about the article stating that you can be the best at something, you just need to find your niche. Then we have someone who says it's wrong to lie to people about being able to find a niche. Then I point out that for something like songwriting there is indeed a niche if you're writing about things that are personal. Then this person calls that a coping mechanism and says:

I bet there are lots of songwriters who could make songs about your life that the vast majority of people would agree are better than yours

Well, funny enough, I do know a very talented and accomplished songwriter and he happened to write a song about a memorable night. I happened to write a song about that same memorable night. It's a good enough story that it inspired two songs to be written, professionally recorded, mixed, mastered, and put onto albums with artwork and all of that hoopla and I'm not skittish about retelling a brief synopsis. Tragically, I say that James' song is actually better than my song about the event!

The only song that James has ever written about me is something that triggers your insecurities. Normal adults can indeed mention topical memorable nights like this in casual conversation. Normal adults can joke about "getting laid"... with their wife. Do you get why I added the part about my wife? We literally met at one of James' concerts.

Can you now see the poetry in all of this?

If there is anything at all to be critical of it is that I'm going out of my way to share my music. This is something that I am a bit insecure about! I made the decision awhile ago that my life would be better off if I focused on a career in software engineering as opposed to a career in music. Honestly, I haven't fully come to terms with this choice. I still seek validation for my art. I still hold onto the hope that once the kids are a bit older that perhaps I'll give it another go.

I didn't get that impression at all, I think this comment is revealing more about you than the person you're responding to

> Perhaps it should be; everyone can be the best at something. You have to find your something.

This implies there are at least 8 billion “things to be good at” which I don’t think is necessarily true. I suspect most people are not the best at anything.

True. There are far, far more things to be good at. I can make up a completely new board game right now and I'll be the world champion at it immediately.

At a slightly less extreme level, it's always possible to find something niche enough that is just so obscure that you can become the best by persistence alone. Maybe you're the world expert on blue umbrellas manufactured in 1993.

People don't want to be best at something for the sake of it, but because it brings some perks with it - recognition, fame, money. Being the best in a game which literally nobody else knows is largely meaningless. I mean, try it, it doesn't take much time to make up a trivial game. Does it bring any kind of satisfaction to know you're the best in the world (because nobody else knows it)?

(to be fair, there is also inner satisfaction coming from deep understanding and mastering of some activity, but alone it's rarely enough without any external validation to motivate people)

> I can make up a completely new board game right now and I'll be the world champion at it immediately.

That sounds intuitively true, but it's not.

I thought the same thing, until I met an actual board game genius who beat me at every single game we played that I invented and practiced before playing against him.

That's why he makes a pretty good living creating and selling board games and I don't.

People with talents do exist, unless board games is your thing, it won't work.

This sounds suspiciously like the story of Duke Devlin.

Maybe there are with combinations. I might be the best programmer who can do woodworking, play flamenco guitar, and squat 475 lbs. I'm just waiting for that category to be added to the Olympics.

I think your real niche is going to be creating software for luthiers that enables you to design the flamenco guitar of your dreams. Critically, you discover the ideal guitar body for flamenco is incredibly heavy…

so you’re the best at making yourself happy.

this is a good thing.

That seems like a leap to me. I bet there's plenty of people who could take over that life and rough set of preferences and do a better job of being happy.

i mean, sure? then they’re making themselves happy.

again, this is a good thing, they’re happy.

If I say that some people would be happier in some kind of impossible to reach theoretical, that's not a good thing, is it?

And the person you were talking to didn't even say they were happy! They just said they're the best at some combination of things. Even assuming they are happy, they're probably not near the top of the happiness charts. "best at making yourself happy" looks to me like a completely unfounded guess/hope.

Not best, no. I can be top 10% at a few things, though. Not many, but more than one.

Top 10% doesn't necessarily make me "extraordinary", depending on how you define it. It's enough for it to be part of my something, though.

There was a part in Isaac Asimov's autobiography that stuck with me, where in high school he wasn't the best student in any subject. However, he was the SECOND best at EVERY subject, whereas the "best" students were only the best at one subject. So I think for some people, there is value in not being the "best" at anything but being good a lots of things regardless of overall ranking.

This is what I’ve been implicitly optimizing for my whole life. Breadth over depth, but applied to a field. Pretty good at a lot of things to enable synthesis and creativity across domains. I’m very comfortable not maxing out a narrow set of sun skills, since 95% if the effort goes into the last little bit if performance, and the opportunity cost is then many other skills (or experiences or whatever)

A jack of all trades, master of none, is oftentimes better than a master of one.

Trying to be second best in a large group will also destroy you.

But okay, let's say 95th percentile to make it more achievable. Well, a normal person can reach 95th percentile in several things, but that's out of a list of hundreds of things or more. Being 95th percentile in most things is not going to happen, let alone all things.

As people growing up in Canada were reminded of repeatedly, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX6qUFm1HsI

> These are the words of a young person who was trained to see everyone else's success as an implicit criticism of their own ability and effort. It is not the author's fault. A mentally healthy person, when shown a display of excellence, is impressed, energized, and motivated.

I don't think that's universally accurate. While this is something I have observed living in the US, growing up in Germany was a completely different story: The people in small town Northern Germany went so far as to criticize and attack you for your achievements that far surpassed what they have accomplished. It appears to make them feel jealous and threatened, which in their view is best dealt with by making you less threatening instead of feeling inspired themselves.

Wow. In what way did they attack? Were they neighbors or colleagues?

> The people [...] went so far as to criticize and attack you for your achievements

I've seen this personally, including from family. Actually managed to get to a point with one family member where we could honestly talk about it, and it was a complicated sort of jealousy.

In their case, they correctly noted that I'm not so much smarter or otherwise distinguished as to "deserve" what I've accomplished so much more than them, and they felt cheated. When asked why they didn't do something like what I did, it came down to personal conservatism and fear. I was willing to risk moving to the "big city" without support (my family is poor). They were afraid to try.

You become evidence of their missed opportunities, and that makes them angry at you. So much worse if you are childless and have the temerity to be happy about it - that really pisses off some of them, too.

We call this "Tall Poppy Syndrome" in New Zealand. If you're a tall poppy you get cut down to size. The only successful New Zealanders that are approved of are those that elevate NZ as a whole on the international stage and attribute it to the country rather than their own individual talent and ability.

Here in Japan they say "It's the nail that sticks out that gets hit."

> The people in small town Northern Germany went so far as to criticize and attack you for your achievements that far surpassed what they have accomplished.

Isn’t this a salient feature in US culture? We attack the wealthy, celebrities, politicians. I’m not saying these people are saints by any means or it’s completely unwarranted, but the US seems to have an increasing victimhood culture. It manifests in different shapes and forms, but the outcome is more or less an attack on some person or group of people who we consider to be relatively more “privileged”, and we use that to dismiss their actual accomplishments or whatever good they may have also done. The root of the issue is always about comparing yourself to someone or some group and their accomplishments and justifying one’s or short comings.

Many of the diversity, equity, inclusion initiatives, regardless of good intentions, are spin offs from this.

To be clear, I’m not taking a swing at the social justice movements. But what I am saying is that in US culture, there’s definitely massive resentment of those who are successful.

> Many of the diversity, equity, inclusion initiatives, regardless of good intentions, are spin offs from this.

I agree. Especially equity (as opposed to equality of opportunity) I think is very closely related to the extreme “egalitarianism” we have in the Nordics. The Law of Jante [1] is a great summary of our particular variety.

Be very afraid of this BTW… :)

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante

I think the other part of it is that even if you can be the best at something, there's an enormous opportunity cost to that. We look up to Olympians, but it's tough to fully grasp the amount of sacrifice it takes to win an Olympic gold. You're not going to have a normal social life or other hobbies - you're just doing your sport (or related practice) for as many hours a day as you can without sustaining injuries that would impact your ability to train more.

Same thing with the best musicians, lawyers, researchers and a whole lot of other professions, particularly those that we hold in high esteem - there are a lot of people who want to be at the top, and you can't stop to take a break because plenty of those people will be working more while you rest.

I'd rather be good at a bunch of different things and have enough free time to read a book or play videogames on the weekends than be extraordinary at one thing.

I think this is wrong. The olympians aren’t clearly working harder than other people who are trying hard but not naturally talented or well endowed.

They are working hard, but many people are for far less impressive feats.

Olympians are a combination of both - they have the natural talents/endowment, but they also put in the maximum amount of work. Michael Phelps has an enormous wingspan, but he also trained 5-6 hours a day. If he dropped that to 3 hours a day, he would lose to someone with a slightly smaller (but still well above average) wingspan who's training 5-6 hours a day.

> Michael Phelps has an enormous wingspan, but he also trained 5-6 hours a day

Whereas a postman or police officer work 8 hours a day...

And I'm sure Michael Phelps couldn't deliver mail as well as those postmen. Leaving aside the obvious physical differences between working as a cop and olympics training, what point are you making exactly?

They are working 8 hours a day, not training 8 hours a day.

There's one Belgium (IIRC) football team member in the world cup who, before going pro, worked as a mailman. His comment about that is that people don't realise how hard mailmen have to work. I suspect his life at the top of the most competetive sport is much easier.

I practiced with a state swimming champion. We practiced same number of hours as Phelps. There was no way I would ever get to his level and there was no way he would ever get to Phelps's level. There are tons of people putting in the work for sports and very few Olympians.

> "A mentally healthy person, when shown a display of excellence, is impressed, energized, and motivated."

I would add "inspired" to your list … I frequently visit digital art sites well known for the excellence of the work of their many artists, and scroll through the "showcase" areas especially, seeking out that specific thing. That which impresses me also often inspires me. Helps get the "creative juices" flowing before working with any of my favorite art creation tools (Blender 3D, Inkscape, Krita, Godot game engine, etc…).

What digital art sites are these? Been looking for some good ones.

A couple of my favorite inspirational art sites are SketchFab and DeviantArt. Both have some amazing talent on display on a regular basis, and both have given me inspiration when I'm running short on ideas or creativity. Both also have a quite wide variety of liberally licensed content (creative commons, etc) that you can legally re-use as a starting point for your own works, as long as you conform to the requirements of any given license.

>A mentally healthy person, when shown a display of excellence, is impressed, energized, and motivated.

What's your definition of mentally healthy, then?

Mental health is always assessed through the lens of cultural norms. Where I am (in Sweden) feeling jealous and acting on it is the cultural norm [1]. (Personally I agree with the GP though and see my own culture as sick.)

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante

A mentally healthy person is content to live their own life, is honest, and doesn't hurt people around them.

Negative emotions aren't necessarily an indicator of mental unhealthiness; resentment, disgust, rage, anger, etc. are all healthy responses to the right set of circumstances. However, when these feelings are experienced when there's no danger, deceit, harm, or violation of a bargain or relationship, it implies an inability of the person experiencing the feelings to be content with their own life, and a desire for goodness to go out of the world (I'd rather you not be excellent at all then have to sit here and compare myself to your excellence).

I don't think these feelings are restricted to young people.

They certainly are not, but most people learn them when they're young. I've found that motivated healthy, competent young people rarely turn into bitter adults without a major tragedy.