Most lives are lived by default
raptitude.com
raptitude.com
But I think that's actually the cause of a lot of unhappiness. It's a perpetual "grass is always greener" situation. Say you go on this quest to find the best city to live in. You find a good one, and you're not unhappy. But you'll always have that doubt: "What if I had quested just a little more? Would I have found an even better city?" And that'll bum you out. It becomes the anxiety of "what if".
Happiness is being content with the moment you're in. Having good health, a not-empty stomach, and a roof over your head is already a big step above a significant portion of the world's population. Now this doesn't mean you have to become a mindless lump, barely moving from the couch and uninterested in even the slightest change; but it's a suggestion that perhaps learning to be happy with what you have, where you are, and with what interests you, is, in the long run, precisely what will make you happy.
Most of us can't just find what we're really looking for in life. It doesn't exist yet. We have to make the future, and that's a lot of difficult work.
This does not lead to happiness. Happiness is internal.
If you become happy first from examining yourself internally, then you will naturally make decisions that will lead you to your goals.
For example, if by looking inward and realizing that your goal for the next few years is to become a successful musician, you will probably gravitate to one of the major musical cities, LA, New York or Nashville.
However, if you realize that being a family man and creating a healthy family is your real goal, then having a decent job in a nice suburb is probably where you will end up.
It all comes down to, as you've alluded to, having perspective. I set a goal early in my undergraduate career to be in the very position I'm in today: working for a stable company with a lot of job security, and the ability to use it as a stepping stone in the event I'd like to take on more risk. It's when I remembered the fact that I set that goal and accomplished it fully that I regained the perspective that while the grass may be greener, my grass is already as green as I had always wanted it.
Which becomes its own struggle. Once you've hit an optimal shade of green, there is nothing left to do. Half of the enjoyment comes from actively working to make your proverbial lawn grow to be so green. Do you rip it up and start over to relive that enjoyment, or sit back and watch it grow?
(I'm not an entrepreneur, just a software engineer.)
And yet there is a duality that has always struck me as important, though hard to explain: it's easiest to be happy when you're striving toward a goal you believe in. But you need to keep your sense of self, your ego, non-attached to the outcome of the striving.
That is, you need to invest yourself 100% into doing things that are important to you, but remain detached from whether you ultimately achieve what you wanted to achieve.
I think Buddhists call this "skillful attachment".
Why not work to achieve things of value precisely because they are of value to you?
If you are fixated on the goal, rather than being present performing the actions that will get you to the goal, you are actually less likely to reach the goal successfully. Thinking about the goal obsessively is counterproductive.
Maybe "detach from the outcome" is a better word. Anchor your happiness and well-being on performing the actions within your control that you believe will take you to that outcome, and do not make that happiness and well-being conditional on reaching that outcome.
Excellent point. A bad outcome realized through a correct decision making process is painful, but is still a "better" result than a good outcome realized through a flawed decision making process. When poker players go "on tilt" they start breaking their process and it shows in their long run results.
There are few places where this is more on display than in high stakes poker tournaments.
"Your right is only to work, and never to its fruits. Don't be motivated by the fruits of work. Nor should you be attached to inaction."
If something in the exterior world makes you discontent, then it is not that object which troubles you, but rather your judgement of it; yet to blot out this judgement instantly is within your power. And if your dissatisfaction is based on the condition of your soul, who can prohibit you from correcting your views? Likewise, if you are discontent because you are not doing what seems reasonable to you, why not be active rather than discontent? "But something stronger than me is obstructing me." Still, do not be discontent; for the cause for your inaction is not within you. "But life has no meaning for me if this is not done." Well then, end your life, as calm as if you had succeeded; but don't forget to forgive your adversaries.
Words that strike me in their simplicity and depth every time I read them, but that's Marc Aurel for ya :)
Why would you think that you're off base? From what I gather Marcus Aurelius is a well known* thinker/writer - just ordered a copy of Mediations for myself after reading this post and comments.
* edit
Fyi: you can grab a copy of Meditations from a number of classics sites on the internet:
Thanks for the link, might be good for some light reading until I get the physical copy.
So maybe check it out if you find the old versions slow going.
?
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22marc+aurel%22
"Mark Aurel, auch Marc Aurel oder Marcus Aurelius"
"Google could not find that quote in any translation for Meditations"
That's because I translated it into English from a German translation of Meditations ^^
here's the same thing without that extra step:
http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_aurelius_bkvii...
If therefore it be a thing external that causes thy grief, know, that it is not that properly that doth cause it, but thine own conceit and opinion concerning the thing: which thou mayest rid thyself of, when thou wilt. But if it be somewhat that is amiss in thine own disposition, that doth grieve thee, mayest thou not rectify thy moral tenets and opinions. But if it grieve thee, that thou doest not perform that which seemeth unto thee right and just, why doest not thou choose rather to perform it than to grieve? But somewhat that is stronger than thyself doth hinder thee. Let it not grieve thee then, if it be not thy fault that the thing is not performed. 'Yea but it is a thing of that nature, as that thy life is not worth the while, except it may be performed.' If it be so, upon condition that thou be kindly and lovingly disposed towards all men, thou mayest be gone. For even then, as much as at any time, art thou in a very good estate of performance, when thou doest die in charity with those, that are an obstacle unto thy performance.
You know what, I think I like my version more :P
Ovid, Virgil, Horace...
Some things are awful and you should get out -- but I imagine for a lot of us on this site we can chalk it up to first world problems and not living more in the moment.
I once read (I wish I could remember where, I'm reaching back 10 years here) that if happiness is your goal then you will never achieve it. You will be so busy "looking" for happiness that you will never realize that you are happy.
Instead of making happiness you goal, a person should instead make tangible, achievable goals. Using your example of finding the best city to live in, you could define things that makes a city the best city for you. Good coffee shops, good people, lots of meetups, bars, schools.. the list can go on.
Here are some great ted talks surrounding the topic: http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_ch... http://www.ted.com/talks/martin_seligman_on_the_state_of_psy...
[0] http://www.amazon.com/The-Joyless-Economy-Psychology-Satisfa...
"I will be happy when I get promoted/I buy a house/I move area/Some other future event happens", seems to me to be some sort of mental defence to justify being unhappy now, because obviously you can't be happy now because X hasn't happened yet. The event that's due to happen never makes them happy when it does happen though, they just make another event to pin their supposed future happiness to, all the while missing that life is happening now, friends and family and good times are around now.
Perhaps it's part of the human condition.
Also, it is written by somebody who purports to understand happiness for a sizable fraction of people.
At least he causes happiness in a large number of people who laugh heartily at such a self-centered approach.
Why does that seem strange? There is a large body of research into human happiness. I haven't looked into it closely, but I would be surprised if it completely failed to generalise. It seems completely reasonable to me that someone could suggest "if you act like this rather than like that, you'll be happier" and be right about a majority of people.
See for example: http://lesswrong.com/lw/bq0/be_happier/
(This is a seperate question from whether the author of this particular article knows what he's talking about. I do not take a position on that.)
I reconnected with one of these friends, and he told me his life wasn't perfect. He hadn't reached some state of perpetual bliss that I'd imagined. And he envied that I got to work on creative problems that provided constant challenge. Then he paid for lunch and drove off in his Porsche. If everyone can be happy or unhappy regardless of material things (as long as their basic needs are met), is it better to be rich and happy rather than middle-class and happy?
I find it hard to think of someone whose annual income is in the 200k+ range but who is in massive debt as rich or wealthy. Similarly, someone whose annual income is below 50k but who has no debt, owns their own home free and clear and has massive savings could easily be thought of as wealthy. Of course, "massive" when talking about money is relative to income and debt/savings are likely to be orthogonal to happiness to a large extent. With regards to money and happiness, I think the Micawber principle states it best: "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."
He says nothing about trying to find the best of everything or making sure to squeeze every ounce of happiness out of every decision you make. He's saying people who are unhappy should stop and think about whether or not they're pursuing things that might make them happy in the major aspects of their lives (location, career, friends, hobbies, etc.).
I don't buy into your BS about "learning to be happy with what you have" because it glosses over the whole "what you have" part, which is the crux of the issue. That's like asking miserable people "Have you tried being happy instead of being unhappy?" Brilliant. I'm sure you'll be a top contender for the Nobel Happiness Prize this year.
We actually need very little to be happy, but people now live their lives in way they were not designed to be. As a primordial tribesmen, all people needed were the love and camaraderie of their fellow tribesmen (ie work with close friends), enjoy the thrill of going out on a hunt and being recognized for success (self driven accomplishment and social status), find a mate and raise a family without being a wage slave (adequate free time, no boss), and other aspects of life where you are free to choose.
Today's corporate world has none of these simple aspects. You don't get to choose your colleagues and often don't have anything in common with them. Your work is often assigned to you, and both recognition and reward is shifted towards the company or boss. You have a boss. You make money but all your time is taken away.
You might argue we are materially better off, but biologically our brains our programmed to be happy in the old tribal way.
Some of Paul Graham's essays talk about the same issues.
There were challenges, but generally you had the opportunity to overcome them as the default path. Today the default path does not necessarily lead to self actualization.
Many of us who post here happen to want the same thing: freelancing, side project income, small business, start up. This can't simply be a coincidence, and in my view what they have in common is the autonomy and accomplishment needs we have.
"All of the white people who joined Indian tribes loved it and refused to go back to white civilization. All the Indians who joined white civilization hated it and did everything they could to go back to their previous tribal lives."
http://squid314.livejournal.com/340809.html (There's a lot more on the subject than just the bit I quoted.)
I think longing for external recognition is a sign of a deeply wounded soul, of a person lacking the most fundamental self-love and self-esteem.
Additionally, it's a common misconception that primordial man was a poor wretch that scrounged for food, fought larger predators and generally lived a life in constant fear and hunger.
I once read an article on Mark's Daily Apple (http://www.marksdailyapple.com/about-2/who-is-grok/#axzz2ENJ...) that paints quite a different picture of a paleolithic lifestyle.
From the article, the paleolithic man, "...leads a life of relative peace, consistent rhythm, adequate sleep, and little stress. There are times of scarcity, to be sure, but his body is adapted to generally weather their strain."
As an entrepreneur, my goal is to earn enough to allow me live more simply and get back into the proper rhythm of life. How much money is that? I don't know yet, but the primary goal isn't to get rich, it's to get free.
I wouldn't worry about stock price as you hopefully never have to sell a good income payer. But if you are buying, at some point a good dividend payer will fall until it's cheap enough for a good return, ie wait for the next crash. I think the dividend stocks are being sold off now because of uncertainty over tax rules in 2013 for dividends, and also since money has been chasing yield and made those stocks overbought.
It's like looking for the 'perfect distro'. Just pick one and learn to love it.
I think another thing to remember is that no matter how hard we try, it's not really possible to guarantee that our lives will always be "improving". Somewhere sometime we would all be better off learning to take the good with the bad - this will free us up to experiment and try new things without being completely reckless. As a result, I believe we'll all live more fulfilling lives.
As Buckaroo Banzai says: No matter where you go, there you are.
See also: Optimizers vs. satisficers.
I actually have 10 years experience with this. I've somewhat settled in one city (Rio) after all those years searching and moving. It's the best fit I've found but not the best in all categories. I think that's the best one can hope for, without turning it into a 20-yr quest...
I made a conscious decision right then to turn off the "Life autopilot switch" as I call it.
I quit my good job, sold all my stuff, and spent 2 years driving 65,000km from Alaska to Argentina in my little 2 door Jeep. It was a life changing experience, and I was shocked when I visited my old workplace afterwards to see the same people, doing the same things, with the same blank expressions on their faces.
http://theroadchoseme.com is my blog of the entire journey.
I'm so passionate about helping and encouraging others to do something similar, I created http://wikioverland.org as a resource for people wanting to travel in this way. I also give presentations and talks about what I've done, and will be doing more of it shortly.
I am currently aware of 5 couples driving the Pan-American highway who directly say I gave them the courage to do it. I have never had a better feeling in my entire life.
I chose the Marine Corps instead of college as my way out. After, I still didn't have enough so I chose adventures, sold everything, kept nothing to continually indulge in my wanderlust instead of sitting in a cube.
But...
And I say this with as much love as I can muster to a stranger that I see as a kindred spirit.
But...
What did you find at the end? Was it nothing? Because that's what I found. I'm just a tourist.
There's nothing. And one day you might realize all that running, all that effort exerted, it got you no where.
You might also arrive at the final destination realizing that your existence and your way to exist is but merely at the mercy of the system.
Your friends that kept doing the same things? With the same blank expressions?
You're not better than them. I thought I was, but the final destination is to realize you're not.
You exist because they exist. If everyone was going out to do and chase whatever it is they want there will be no room for you. Ordered society will succumb to chaos and nothing will be done. There will be no roads for you to travel, no places for you to tour, no joy for you to find.
In all, there's no blackness for your star to shine.
You have to accept that. And in doing so you might find that the steady ones, the one that did everything they were told, might end up being the ones that have the most. Compared to you, the one that gave up to always pursuing something else.
Because that's actually the immature way of handling life. And that's the continually reaction I keep getting from people that's done the same thing. Thinking that the replacement of running for life is somehow worth something to keep telling others.
That if you're given the lucky opportunity to be born into an environment providing for a good life in the good part of the world, you should take that and make good on it.
Because others? In worse places, having to do worse things to survive. They would do every single possible thing short of dying to be in your position. Yet you chose to be a tourist. Building nothing, doing nothing, creating nothing, but indulging in everything.
Do good, be good. Age and experience grants you wisdom that running doesn't get you any closer to those two things.
> What did you find at the end? Was it nothing? Because that's what I found.
I wasn't "looking" for anything, other than to enjoy my life. I enjoyed those 2 years immensely, and without a doubt in my mind, more than I would have if I stayed at work "on autopilot". That's why I did it - because I wanted to. It's the same reason you (or anyone) has ever done anything in their life above bare survival. Because you want to.
>You're not better than them
I've never once thought that for even a second. Actually, I learned on the drive to look at life (mine and others) from a whole bunch of different perspectives. Never do I think in terms of "better or worse", always "different". Just because people are doing something I don't want to, that doesn't make my way "better", not by a long shot. It just means my choices are different than theirs.
> If everyone was going out to do and chase whatever it is they want there will be no room for you. Ordered society will succumb to chaos and nothing will be done
Interesting you should say that. This was one of the greatest lessons I learned on the whole drive: At the start of Latin America (Mexico) I wondered why people were so "lazy" and relaxed all day with friends and family while the roof on their house leaked. I continually thought of ways to try and make stuff better (in the western sense of the development, etc.) After 18 months, and many hours pondering and discussing, my Spanish was finally good enough to have a great conversation about it. A guy in Argentina described it to me brilliantly. The difference is credit. In the first world, when we want for example and iPhone, we go and put it on our credit card (or monthly payments) then work for the next couple of years to pay it back. The connection between how much you have to work for the iPhone and the joy of owning the iPhone is very fuzzy. Our society doesn't want us to make that connection, because it needs us to keep buying stuff, and keep going to work. In the second and third world, nobody can get credit, so if you want an iPhone, you have to go to work for a year, save like mad, then buy it outright. Let's be honest, after a week of full time work any sane person is going to seriously question if they want a stupid iPhone, realize it's not worth it, so they'll go back to working the bare minimum and relaxing with friends and family. The end result is that people in second and third world countries have way less stuff, but have way more time with friends and family. Also it's worth noting that society doesn't "collapse". People still have a roof, food, clothes and happiness. I think about this every day.
> you might find that the steady ones, the one that did everything they were told, might end up being the ones that have the most.
The most what?
As an aside, do you live in Alaska as your username suggests? I live in Whitehorse, Yukon these days.
I'm very interested in what it means today, and how I choose to incorporate it into my life. That's why I really enjoy learning from people that follow it to a large extent, and those that don't.
It was very likely a product of the Reformation, and almost certainly had nothing to do with debt. Specifically, the ethic arose from the philosophies of Luther and Calvin in the 16th century. Prior to L&C, the dominant Catholic line held that hard work was a means to achieve salvation. Work was punishment. If you weren't performing good works you would go to hell. Working hard to serve your god? Good: perhaps you will be saved. But don't work too hard, because hoarding wealth is a sin. Pay your excess forward to the Church and it will help your cause in the end.
Luther didn't exactly turn this conception on its head but altered it, which opened the doors for later change. He believed that work was good because it served not only the individual but also the social whole. The main expression of this was a dissolution of occupation-based social hierarchies. For example Luther rejected that something like agricultural work was inherently less valuable than a monastic calling. All work had value, and all work had equal value in the eyes of God. The main thing is that each person was called to work by God, and to work was to exercise your noble calling. This is basically an inversion of the concept of work as punishment.
Calvin both carried Luther further and branched out. His was probably the first interpretation of Christianity to state that maximizing profit from one's work was not only good but also required. This wasn't a call to maximize profit in pursuit of an easy life, since even rich folk had a duty to perform hard work. Rather the duty was to improve the Kingdom of God (and one's society) through investment. This doesn't mean philanthropy or giving to the poor, rather something like modern capitalism where an individual's investment (sometimes, often) produces positive effects for those around him. Devoted, hard workers help to maintain a cohesive social whole, which in turn mitigates the chaos and disorder that might stem from idleness.
Underlying Luther's and to a greater extent Calvin's philosophies is the notion of predestination. Dominant Catholic thought posited that people were born sinners but could earn salvation over a lifetime. Predestination rejected this, stating instead that God chooses the saved at birth. That is, you're either saved or you're not out of the womb, and there's nothing you can do about it. During your life, you can't know whether or not you are one of the elect. However you sure as heck want to be, so you do your best to live in the way you think the elect would live. If you succeeded, this could be perceived as evidence of your having been chosen to be saved. Hence the social drive to work extremely hard and produce as much as possible.
The above is probably a bit rambling and somewhat of a bastardization, but it's generally correct. Given that, I'm not surprised that in a historically Catholic region you came across a very Catholic take on work, which is at odds with the conception of work you're used to in historically Protestant America.
And your 'everything is vanity' stance? While to some extent, it is true, everything is vanity, only the superficial changes, there will still be wars, there will still be famine, there will still be droughts, there will still be power struggles, there will still be times that seem good, and so on, at least in the long view of things, you can still effort to be useful and to make a positive difference, and to grow as a person, and maybe, just maybe, to find that way in which you can make that part of your world, at least for the time you are alive, a little bit better; and if you're lucky, a bigger part of your little world a lot better.
In all, I don't think he was running. Or rather, I don't think he was only running. I think he was escaping to clear his mind and work to decide what was really important so he could then do that when his journey was over.
So what's he doing now? I don't think the wiki is paying rent... I could be wrong.
I'm back working in an office. I'm really enjoying the routine, having a place to live, go to the gym, cook good food etc.
I have no idea what the future holds, but that's how I like it :)
> Ordered society will succumb to chaos and nothing will be done. There will be no roads for you to travel, no places for you to tour, no joy for you to find.
I'm a guy in his early 30s, recently separated, living in a rented studio, with only a laptop, a few books and a plasma TV (for watching sports from time to time). That's it, but I don't care, as long as I can earn my living, earning a salary, getting me through life.
Yes, I'm happy because I can afford paying bills with money earned through my work (I still hate the bills per se, though :) ). My model is my peasant grand-mother, now almost aged 85, who has worked for each day of her adult life (she got married at 17). She only once went on a trip/tourism thingie to the mountains that she can see from her backyard. She hated the whole thing :) because that meant that while she was on the trip with my grand-father work would not get done back at home. When I last spoke with her she was upset that her body was feeling more and more weak, and that prevented her from working (feeding the cows, doing stuff around the home etc.).
The journey is the reward.
I agree 100% that finding hobbies and pursuits is very important to overall balance and piece of mind. I'm addicted to snowboarding, camping, hiking and pretty much everything else outside. On my trip I estimate I camped in my tent 500 nights of the 667.
I'm a keen moose / bison / caribou hunter here in Northern Canada, and I fish every year for Salmon in Alaska, and lake trout around here. Fishing within 30 meters of a grizzly bear is something else :)
I'm actually just about to write up our recent moose trip, where we canoed a remote river for a week without seeing another person, or signs of people. We got a 58 inch moose on that trip. It will be on theroadchoseme.com when I get around to it.
I wrote about this yesterday http://davidolesch.github.com/2012/12/05/how-to-choose-your-...
Yes, many people could improve their situation by not sleepwalking through life. But similarly, we (people on HN and other ambitious folks) can learn to be more content with what life has given us. To reconcile ourselves with randomness. To take some time away from competition and drive and optimization.
Perhaps I'm being unfair to the author, but if you follow this article's advice to the extreme, you'll likely end up extremely unhappy. "Is this spouse really the best I can do? Should I really be living in this city? Would I be happier with different friends?"
This life obviously doesn't appeal to everyone, and many entrepreneurs manage to keep a balanced life. But at some point they'll get outmaneuvered by the ones who move faster and just want it more (and are willing to take the chance of flaming out in a big way).
In PG's essay "How to Make Wealth" he wrote "you can think of a startup as a way to compress your whole working life into a few years. Instead of working at a low intensity for forty years, you work as hard as you possibly can for four." [1] But the reality I've observed (and experienced myself) is that this period of working intensely for four years changes you deeply. Rather than working for four years intensely, you'll either burn out entirely in that time span or spend the entirety of your life working intensely - you become a workaholic, hanging out for the next start-up, next opportunity, etc. and constantly feeling like shit because you never made the big break. Or perhaps you did make the break, so instead you'll feel like shit because it wasn't big enough. Or maybe you did make it big in the past but _right now_ you're not so you feel like a one trick wonder, etc.
I'm confident that a random sampling of HN regulars will show most are depressed, even if they've been successful.
> That doesn't seem correct either.
A rule that's always appealed to me is "Everything in moderation, including this rule."
And it sounds like your view of the process cones from only examining high profile winners. It's like basing your opinion of music or sports as a career based on the highly improbable success of the musicians and athletes you've heard of.
I imagine that there are some people, especially in finance, who do what they do purely for money and lifestyle, but the "entrepreneurs" I admire would do what they do for free.
edit- re: extremes, for clarification, a balance of extremes :)
That is the end of the conversation on happiness and most people for me. Despite being brilliant and greatly successful in their chosen fields, not a person I was friends with in school is now in a job that they take joy in. None of my old coworkers who talked on and on about how they hated their jobs have moved on to better things. The most contented people I know do not do very much with their lives. These are not the 'successful' people, nor are they people with whom I would want to spend an enormous amount of time, as they do not have much of interest to say.
It has been suggested that melancholia and depression are deeply related to intelligence and creativity. Good; bring it on. I would much rather have moments of doubt and darkness and get to enjoy all the fruits of the intellectual and creative life than the banal calmness of normal existence.
Every now and again I think back to that. At this exact moment, I could be sitting in my old cubicle, watching that same stretch of bridge under the gray skies outside my window, thinking of the things that could have been if only...
The one most important lesson I've learned in casting off from the moorings of a safe life is that no matter what crazy shit happens, I always find a way to come out on top in the end, even if there are a few months or even years of bad times in between. One thing's for sure: I never get bored.
A life of interesting times is not for everyone. You need to have a fairly high tolerance to uncertainty. You need to be able to improvise, because things will rarely go according to plan. You need the strength of will to stand back up even when it hurts. But even with this said, you'd be VERY surprised at how strong you can be when the need arises.
Not everyone is alike. Not everyone would appreciate this kind of life. But if you're sitting there in your comfortable life, wondering what it could be like, stop wondering and just GO!
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:TT52BMn...
I resonate with the post a lot. Recently moved to the bay area, after spending undergraduate years in chicago, working in nyc, hong kong, beijing, I feel that where we live determines a lot of how we live our lives, and people we associate with.
I disagree with the comments here that the author is suggesting that happiness is a goal. He's merely, in my view, presenting the fact that we should strive to make difficult decisions on our lives before it's too late. Choosing where we live is one of the most difficult things to change, however, all changes can start small.
Two years ago I took a sabbatical from my finance job, and never went back. It was a zig zag path to where I am now, but I would say the inconvenience and uncomfortable situations are worth it. So many people tell themselves, I'll stay in this job / city / relationship for one more year, till I get more experience / savings etc. Making difficult decisions (instead of putting them off) forces us to clarify our values. We might decide in the end to never leave the city, or the job, but we are happier because we decide consciously to, not because we dont' have a choice.
Things that you thought meant something for you actually don't. Things that you thought you'd keep for life actually turn out to be nonimportant. People you considered close were just vehicles for you: you gave them that love you didn't know how to give to yourself. And finally, things that you so cunningly shielded from your gaze for years begin to pop up and become unavoidable challenges.
That is because you can only be happy when you do things for the right reasons. Otherwise you just think you're happy and yet you spend your time trying to fill in gaps in yourself and your life, gaps that you don't know how to love. In other words, you're sitting on the passenger's seat yourself and letting what you think other people will think of you drive your life.
Go stand in front of a mirror and ask yourself if you're happy. Are you so happy that you wouldn't want to change anything in your life? Are you so happy that while you might certainly want to change some things you would still be perfectly content should those things actually never change? Ask yourself if there's some part of yourself that you don't love one hundred percent? Not 99, but 100? Ask yourself if you see too much fat, a body too skinny, or a person too unpopular and rejected, or someone who can't steer away from too many bad habits? Or do you see a person with weaknesses yet completely accept him/her just the way s/he is?
I'm not entirely happy myself but there have been, and there are, occasional moments when I am 100% happy.
It's those moments when I wouldn't replace a single bit of myself, whether it's hemorrhoids, feelings of guilt, or the history of how I've lived.
I think we would look down on someone who spent their life stoned. I do not see why this method of achieving the "happy" feeling as any less admirable than any other method. In the end, you are just striving to be chemically stoned, though one method uses outside chemicals to achieve this feeling and the other uses activities and experiences of a non-chemical nature. In the end you are just striving to put and to keep your brain in some chemical state. Does not seem like much to me.
Christopher Hitchens -- who has been on my mind much as the first anniversary of his death is in nine days -- once said that if offered a stress-free and blissful life, he would not want it, that he likes the feeling of burning the candle at both ends and the stress of things. Do not make the mistake of saying that he has redefined happiness for himself to mean the state of stress, because that is not what we are talking about when people talk about wanting to "be happy". They mean they want to feel good and joyous. Hitchens did not say that being stressed and attenuated through effort gave him joy, he only said that he preferred this state to anything else. I sympathize with him on this point and take it from me, this is not the same as the "happiness" that most people are talking about. It is more like a state of satisfaction with occasional blimps of good humor mixed in with a great deal of unpleasant emotions. But, stiff upper lip and all that.
I think anyone who imagines that if they start a startup and strike it rich that, like a Sim, all their need meters will max out at green and they will feel permanently joyous is completely kidding themselves. This just is not how life goes. Life does not plateau at joy. It is a constant moving wave.
I do admit that happiness is an ambiguous word: for some people it's about merely feeling good and for some people happiness is just a side-effect from the realization that what you have now is all you can actually claim to have—the past and the future don't count. The conversation started from happiness so I sort of bridged over with that word.
I care about living my own life, not somebody else's, and making choices in life for reasons I'm aware of instead of for reasons I don't. At least for me, happiness comes mostly about facing the facts of your life and accepting them.
Being stoned isn't happiness, it's disconnectedness. Living a happy life isn't about that it always feels good but about that it does good. But in the long term that, too, actually gives a good feeling as well.
anyway, this post is so second stage it makes me wince.
From what I can understand: It isn't possible to reach the second stage without first exploring the first as you need to know the baseline to understand the differences between options. Also it isn't possible to reach the third stage without the second because you don't have a full intuitive understanding of what effect each variable has.
Based off this I don't see the post being second stage as a necessary negative, the aim of the article is to nudge people from the following stage into the detaching stage.
I imagine when reading the original article people in the following stage have most potential benefit, people in the detaching stage will agree with the article and won't learn much (but maybe it will affirm their beliefs a bit) and people in the fluent stage have surpassed the advice in the article and will regard it as backwards.
in my defense, all i can say is that what rubs me the wrong way is not the process, or the fact that someone is learning, but the tone. yes, we're all on these different stages at different times. but once you acknowledge that, shouting about any particular one as "the" solution seems a bit strong. especially when you know that you're going to look back on this particular point as just one more - perhaps confused - step.
Grief is a negative factor that directly impacts your life, like your car breaking down, or dreading going home to your spouse.
Grief can be the lack of free time or the abundance of it.
Grief is not I could be x units of happiness happier if I moved to California, therefore I am x units of happy less than I could potentially be.
I think most people know when something is missing in their life. They know if they HATE going to their job. They know if they HATE their neighborhood. In those cases, by all means seeks something better.
Basically this is the same argument has the "I want the best of everything" articles and the 50 dollar utensils. Many people pointed out you don't need the best or the worst you need good enough. What good enough is, is going to change from person to person. However I think we all have a pretty good idea about what good enough (both materialistically, and philosophically).
Aristotle was right, in my opinion.
When reading the post about the example giving of the guy who seems happy I thought to myself, "this guy sounds a lot like me, why wouldn't he be happy?" I was disappointed to discover that the only reason he wasn't happy was because he is basically choosing to be unhappy in what seems like a good situation.
I once thought I wanted to climb the corporate ladder, to buy stuff, toys. More, more, more...
I made my way into software management back in 2008. I was absolutely miserable. The routine, wake up to an alarm, get ready, run to work, work on someone else's ideas, have to listen to someone tell me what to do. When I got home, I had no energy to work on my own stuff. Work, had stolen all my will power and mental energy. I consoled myself, by losing myself in movies and games, drinking.
Then in 2009, I was so miserable I deliberately worked to get terminated with severance. I was successful. The evening I was fired I was so happy. I was set for 1 year. I moved from L.A. to San Francisco.
Got an apartment, and started learning all of adobe's tools (my friend got me a free copy of their top suite, he worked there). I experimented with many different compression algorithm techniques, I worked on neural networks. Then after 9 months, and the money running out I took a trip to Budapest Hungary for 1 month to learn how to make bespoke shoes. I had never in my life been so happy. I discovered that I hate working for other people, hate it, absolutely hate it, I'd rather live on the street.
I got back and found a startup where I could make great money, knowing I would quit at the end of one year. And like clockwork, after the initial enjoyment of doing something new, getting to write firmware which was something new, it was time to get out. This time, knowing I was quitting made all the difference, I didn't get burned out. I wasn't angry. A couple months later an opportunity arose to do some consulting, 2 months in and I was set. I doubled my income and got to walk away. 6 months later and the original manager quit, they needed someone to come in and rescue them, I showed up. Charged twice what I've ever made. The money was awesome, I paid off a second mortgage ($60k). I saved $100k after tax. After 8 months, couldn't take it anymore.
But this time I had a plan, it was time to start my own company, where I am the boss, where I can eventually get to the point where I hire other people to do all the work and I draw income from a business that doesn't consume my life.
I'm 2 months in on my first company product, it's hard work, but it doesn't feel like work. I am my own boss, I decide what is important, I don't interrupt myself with stupid inefficient task switching, there are no office politics, I don't have to listen to the 'normies' and their pathetic existence as they skate through life anesthetized.
I love the uncertainty, I thrive on it. To have a predictable mundane life is walking death. To actually have complete control over my own success and failure is invigorating. I have 22 months left of runway, and if it fails? So what, I can always pick up a temporary consulting gig. The experience I am learning now is making me far more valuable than being an employee ever will.
Some key things I learned, which made this possible:
1) eliminate anyone and everyone negative in my life: friends, family... anyone.
2) stop hanging around people who espouse and vigorously defend the "normal" lifestyle
3) surround myself with positive and also like minded individuals
4) take pleasure in simple things, cooking a good meal, reading an interesting book, going for a bike ride, accomplishing a small milestone.
5) Eliminate debt, do I really need that fancy car? (unless I can pay cash)
6) I got rid of my tv, don't miss it for a second, it just wastes my time
7) Got my living expenses down really low, yet I'm living the richest life I've ever had.
8) Free time to cook, allowed me to discover that I have a severe gluten intolerance. Doctor's never figured it out, just told me I was "depressed", that I needed to eat more fiber (which is gluten). Since I had eaten gluten almost every single meal my entire life there was no gap to discover how much better I felt. This would never, ever have happened if I had kept a regular M-F job. I never had time to cook semolina pizza dough, muffins, cakes and eat so much that the 1-1 correlation between what I was eating and how I felt clicked.
9) Don't fear change, embrace it
10) It's easy to make new friends
11) I'm actually an extrovert, it's the people I was surrounded with my whole life that made me seem like an introvert, I just didn't want to interact with them.
12) Stop caring what other people think, what makes them happy might make me miserable (one man's heaven is another man's hell)
13) Be happy so many people choose to take the easy way out, on cruise control. It makes it so much easier to be successful myself with so little competition.
14) Be a source for anyone who is also trying to figure out who they are and what they really want to do.
15) Stop trying to give people advice when it is unwanted.
16) Life is about the journey, not the destination. SOMEDAY STARTS NOW!
* anyone offended please feel free to skip my message, it's not for everyone. My way is not for everyone, it is not a 'universal right way'. But it is most definitely the right way for me, and for any lost souls out there (which I once was). I hope that this post may make them think, think about how to change their life for the better too.
I know for myself that filling the boss role wouldn't suit me, yet I cannot let things get decided without being involved. The role I'd like to fulfil is not the boss but more like the second in command: still a good impact without as much stress (theoretically). I believe it also depends on the size of things. I wouldn't mind being my own boss, but not being someone else boss. That's a reason why I wouldn't dare to start up something from myself.
Also, I found the same thing about myself concerning the fact that after doing the same thing for several weeks, changes are needed. The time span before needing change and the size of the change required differs, but I believe every one feels this need at some point. Personally, just staying curious and learning news things all the time helps me with that. It's enough to keep me going on the same job for almost two years.
Concerning the key things, most of them could be generalized and should be followed by most people. As for the 16th rule, if it was about destination, we would all be using shortcuts and be there in five minutes.
People write with a sense of being illuminated, of knowing something that others don’t. A thinking person should not trust such things. All the same, it can be hard not to check it out--give it some eyeball-time.
I won't lie: I read this crap all the time when it comes up on HN. (One might speculate as to why.)
Anyway, I notice the patterns these things follow.
- Laying claim to an illuminated or gnostic truth. Someone who “gets” it, while others don’t.
- Hinting that you will benefit if you accept the claim as true.
- Lastly (optional), appealing to the ego, to the desire to feel superior.
This article was not so bad, in comparison. It stuck to its thesis without playing too much dirty pool. Its thesis was simplistic (essentially, "take risks"), which did not interest me that much.
I honestly think people should look more carefully at the rhetoric they feed on.
What gave me happiness is the idea in Buddhism fostering compassion for all people, including yourself, but not only yourself. It's the one aspect of Buddhism that most people ignore. Instead they concentrate on inner peace by quieting their mind or stopping their thoughts, which again is striving for a change in what they have, (ie. they would gain the ability to quiet their mind)
I don't mean to be heavy handed, and I'm not trying to force my ideas on others. I just haven't seen this idea of compassion for people brought up very often.
But, overall, I agree. Facing oneself and seeing the world as opportunity for love, joy, and compassion makes for a rich life.
Would you be able using Buddhism to transform yourself to enjoy the surrounding or you better of moving to a big city with more happening around you?
I found that by living in different places you discover who you are. Then you can use the Buddhist approach to cope better with the downsides of living in the current area.
The "killer quote" that pushed me over the edge to post this was: "It could be a major change, like getting rid of your spouse" .... seriously? "Til death do us part...or I feel like you're not making me happy"?
I do not believe true joy is found in selectively surrounding myself with people that make me happy and "eliminating" all others. In fact, to act as if true joy is "just around the corner" if we would simply make the right changes like learning how to surf is a dangerous illusion to give.
The probability that one's current conditions are anywhere near optimal is low. Likewise, the probability that you can improve your overall conditions by making a change in one of the areas is high, since it's not a completely random change but one that you control.
A sort of real life analog of gradient descent (ascent) or hill climbing, if you will.
Am I happy because I enjoy my current my current life, or am I convincing myself that I am happy because I don't want to take chances?
Since it is not a feeling I enjoy, I ended up living on a daily basis; Have I enjoyed my day, Did I really wanted to do that, What should I do to enjoy my time? I lived mostly in the present for several years, doing a job I enjoyed at the time, and enjoying my time outside as well. Anything that I didn't want to do right away wasn't worth doing. It got to the point where I was pushing away feelings just because I didn't like them, such as regrets or stress from late tasks.
It didn't pay that well. After a while, I had a lot of late bills (not that I couldn't pay, I just didn't want to do it right now), I wasn't looking forward to know what to do with my future, etc. The good thing I learned from that is looking forward for good feelings and investing myself in what I enjoy.-Turns out I had a promotion at my job, and I liked my new tasks, and since then, I've been studying at night to build a career from it.-I also learned to fix things up in time because when every thing works out well, when you have nothing due to anyone, you feel better, you feel freed from those responsabilities for the time being.
I also believe in balance, in the meaning that if you only have good things happening to you, they aren't actual good things, they are normal neutral things. You need sadness, bad things, to enjoy even more the good things happening. Just like peace doesn't mean anything to someone that doesn't know its counterpart.
Put this altogether, you end up with a range from the worst feeling you can have, to a middle, to the greatest feeling you can have. I chose to be near the middle. I don't enjoy having bad feelings, and I prefer to have a neutral life, with good enough feelings. I doesn't mean that I don't want to suffer, to go through rough times, it only means I know to which extent I can go on this range, at which point it's not worth it.
Ultimately, living by default or not is, in my vision and understanding, at which point you are ready to sacrifice things to maybe get better things on the other side. Am I ready to sacrifice my marriage to maybe find a better women? Am I ready to dump friendship to maybe get better? I like the place where I live enough, it could be better but do I really want to go through all this work to maybe find something better? I really don't mind living by default, as long as I don't suffer from it, and I currently don't. Maybe I'll have regrets later on, but regrets are not worth having, so I'll chase them away as good as I can.
These days in western societies, quite a few people hold this notion that can be best summed up as, "Happiness, to a large degree, comes from within"
Or as a corollary, one can use whats been offered by neumann_alfred below:
If something in the exterior world makes you discontent,
then it is not that object which troubles you, but rather
your judgement of it; yet to blot out this judgement
instantly is within your power. And if your
dissatisfaction is based on the condition of your soul,
who can prohibit you from correcting your views?
The external world and the facets one finds disagreeable or troubling in it, just seem too Olympian a task to impact, much less expunge.
This paves the way for one to easily resolve to the aforementioned world view where one just finds easier to remedy his or her "judgment" of that disagreeable or "troubling" aspect, rather than engage it.
There must be a label for this phenomenon in the study of strategic decision making (Game theory).
Please do enlighten, if you're familiar with it.
"life is what happens to you while waiting for your dreams" or
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans"
If I really did bet for $10 that it's wordpress every time a site goes down on the HN homepage, I could simply quit my job. Perhaps I should ask $10 to optimize Wordpress websites (aka install a caching plugin and done), hmm...
The new year is coming up. Might be time for the Rejection Therapy 30 Day Challenge again.