Comment by yelsgib | Hacker News Reader

Comment by yelsgib | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I guess this comment is going to be pretty unpopular, given the comments that most have left before it, but I find this post creepy in the extreme.

For one thing, it's naive. Any attempt to assert that "X is entirely my fault" is naive. How can you eliminate the impact of your circumstances? For instance, you're here in 2012, working in San Francisco - one of the most exciting times/places ever.

For another, it's happiness-centric, which is boring. I basically don't trust anyone who says that the point of their life is "happiness." Frankly, the idea creeps me out. Sure, happiness is nice. So are transcendance, admiration, comfort, contentment. I also like nostalgia, gloom, longing, ... Life is not some simple game where you can just declare yourself the winner.

Finally, it's positivity-centric. One of my least favorite things about the ethos of the bay area is its inability to bluntly deal with negative feelings/ideas. Everything's always supposed to be getting better all the time - feeling better, running faster, etc. It's boring and unrealistic.

I worry about what will happen to someone who has this sort of mindset when they are older - when the illusion that they are in control of their happiness begins to fade - what happens when calamity strikes.

The universe is very old and you are a tiny speck in it. Concentrating on yourself in this way is like a dog chasing its own tail.

PS - God, and it's so arrogant. I hate this type of "I've figured it out! Eureka!" post/sentiment/essay. It's like a Buddhist claiming that they've been enlightened. It just smacks of self-aggrandizement and insecurity. Blech.

I mostly agree with what you're saying, but I also mostly agree with what the post is saying.

The point is that you can learn to control your reactions to things, and it's a good thing. I used to be extremely stressed out by any social situation. I eventually stopped being so through lots of practice at controlling myself and telling myself "who cares what other people think of me?". And I'm all the better for it. I also have learned to ignore insults and failure (well, ignore them emotionally, though I still try to analyze them rationally), because they give negative emotions that I don't enjoy. However, I still feel nostalgia when I realize "oh shit, that happened seven years ago?!!", and I still feel a rush of excitement when I succeed at getting everything done in a limited amount of time.

Also, the fact that I'm a tiny speck in the universe is the reason I focus on myself. If nothing really matters, you get to choose what does. And I choose myself.

There is a mature aspect to this sentiment, even if it is not expressed in this particular post.

For a counter to your argument see Viktor Frankl:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Frankl http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27s_Search_for_Meaning

Thanks a lot for your comment, disagreement males you question your assumptions and strengthens your understanding of the issue.

Is there a body of research that supports your counter-claims? I'd love to read anything you can point me to.

WTF are you talking about? A body of research? Are you out of your mind? This response actually sounds like a form response for when anyone disagrees with you.

To answer your question by deconstructing it: which one of my claims could possibly be supported by empirical research? The fact that I like gloom, nostalgia, and complex forms of pleasure? Or perhaps the idea that it's extremely hard to disambiguate the contribution of your circumstances to your happiness from your own contribution? Or maybe my own personal observations regarding the bay area?

Seriously, what type of research are you looking for?

"Scientists find that yelsgib likes gloomy feelings."

"Sociologists determine that the bay area concentrates on positive feelings to the exclusion of negative ones."

"Cosmologists determine that we are a very small part of the universe."

Are you actually this obtuse? My good god. I seriously cannot believe your response. It seriously blows my mind. I don't even know why I'm responding. It bothers me that I'm even responding. Are you trolling me?

The first line of your response is that "disagreement males (sic) you question your assumptions and strengthens your understanding of the issue." What assumptions did I make you question? How was your understanding of "the issue" strengthened by my response? Did you say these things because you meant them? Or do you just say whatever pops into your head without regard to whether it makes sense or you actually believe it? Did you even read what I wrote?

Holy christ on a cracker.

I love the internet.

Ugh. Pleeeeeeeeease just stop for a second, get your head out of your own head, and actually think for yourself about something. The way you say 'I love the internet' is just such a smug way of brushing off real criticism. This is not an example of 'Some crazy guy on the internet yelling at me for no reason'. The commenter just really in his first claim stated some things, though perhaps a little harsh(the post really was just about happiness, so its a little strange to berate him for making a happiness-centric post when that was the point), was just there to show how his personal opinion differed from how you had(or had not...) actually thought about the quotes. However, there is no excuse for your first reply. Honestly, can you go read what you wrote and justify anything you said?

"Thanks a lot for your comment, disagreement males you question your assumptions and strengthens your understanding of the issue." - Why would you write this? What is the point of writing this statement? No really, pleeeeeeease, stop working on whatever you are doing, and for your own benefit. Put down Flow. Put down your code. Read this, and figure out really what you mean here. Why would you respond with such a condescending sentence to someone who actually read what you said and wrote very really 'personal' arguments against it?

Is there a body of research that supports your counter-claims? I'd love to read anything you can point me to - Same trick again here, go ahead and read this line again, but there is a part 2 to this task. You now need to go read the commenters post. I feel he makes it very very clear in his words and in his tone that all his objections are his just his own thoughts and opinions on the subject. To be honest, I feel like an idiot explaining this to you, but I feel I need to because if I don't you may ask me if I have any 'evidence' to back up my claims. Honestly, please go read that again and if you can justify why you said those words, please reply with them. Please.

Finally, I'm sorry to say all this, and sorry to repeat some of the commeters criticism, but I was just so irritated reading this. As naive and show offy as your blog post was, the kind of behavior shown in your response is 10000X as intolerable, and is just too common with people with that sense of false intellectualism in Silicon Valley. The arrogance and condescension and just lack of respect youve shown creates dividers in people that don't need to exist, and really just decreases everyone's happiness.

Welcome to my blacklist.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com