[quote]polo77j wrote:
I love the deconstruction of the article. Here is this man who is giving what amounts to meta-advice. Advice that is meant for the aggregate of the unmotivated. Now we have people who are saying “this isn’t necessarily so because…” and then go on to give an anecdote about their experience with a fraction of a percent which is the exact opposite of the point of the article.
[/quote]
Nope the article is wrong - because the author is a sheltered tool.
“Either you will go about the task of seeing to those needs by learning a unique set of skills, or the world will reject you, no matter how kind, giving and polite you are. You will be poor, you will be alone, you will be left out in the cold.”
The first point alone illustrates how stupid his point is. Yes you will be poor, alone and out in the cold if you have no marketeable skills (although Kim Kardashian seems to get by fine, but whatever). However, the flipside is also possible: that you could be poor, alone and out in the cold if you DO have marketeable skills - but are an asshole.
See, in the real world, being a nice guy DOES fulfill a need in society. [/quote]
You really don’t provide any kind of evidence or explanation besides your opinion, to which you’re completely entitled.
You’re also only focusing in on one aspect of the over-all message: develop a marketable skill and exercise that skill in a way that is of value to others. There’s unavoidable truth in that which you conveniently choose to not acknowledge.
[quote]polo77j wrote:
I love the deconstruction of the article. Here is this man who is giving what amounts to meta-advice. Advice that is meant for the aggregate of the unmotivated. Now we have people who are saying “this isn’t necessarily so because…” and then go on to give an anecdote about their experience with a fraction of a percent which is the exact opposite of the point of the article.
[/quote]
Nope the article is wrong - because the author is a sheltered tool.
“Either you will go about the task of seeing to those needs by learning a unique set of skills, or the world will reject you, no matter how kind, giving and polite you are. You will be poor, you will be alone, you will be left out in the cold.”
The first point alone illustrates how stupid his point is. Yes you will be poor, alone and out in the cold if you have no marketeable skills (although Kim Kardashian seems to get by fine, but whatever). However, the flipside is also possible: that you could be poor, alone and out in the cold if you DO have marketeable skills - but are an asshole.
See, in the real world, being a nice guy DOES fulfill a need in society. [/quote]
He never said you need to be an asshole, but you DO need to get shit done. [/quote]
Why?
[/quote]
Fair question. I guess you don’t ACTUALLY have to get shit done. You bring up a very valid point that all you have to do in life is die.
For me, however, I want to do shit. There was a recent study that discovered that money CAN buy happiness. It said it can be acheived by spending money on experiences, rather than material items. It’s the difference between buying a lamborghini aventador as opposed to buying a lightly used BMW M6 and then using the difference to fly yourself and three of your best friends to Italy and getting a weekend’s worth of driving lessons from a lambo test driver, or something. I’d love to travel to Mexico twice a year and go cave diving in underwater wonder-worlds. I’d love to be able to provide for a woman who I’m incredibly in love with (and our kids if that was a decision we made.) I’d love to be able to tip a waiter/waitress $100 on an evening where he/she might be having a shitty night. I’d love to go skydiving in exotic locations. I’d love to be able to rent a 5-star hotel room for a homeless guy on Christmass eve so he’d have a hot shower and a warm bed to sleep in. I’d love to be able to give back to my community. I’d love to be able to throw extravagant, kick ass parties with friends in my extravagant, kick ass house while wearing extravagant, kick ass three peice suits. I’d love to be able to grab some friends and take a weekend trip on an offshore sailing trip on my beautiful Hylas 54.
In all reality, I’d still be happy doing a fraction of awesome stuff like that in life, but even doing a fraction of that awesome stuff costs money. And unless you’re a trust fund baby, in order to earn money, you gotta get shit done.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with material items and dreaming big as long as you keep things in perspective. Don’t sacrafice family time, personal relationships, sanity, or happiness in order for 70+ hour work weeks. Stay humble. Think positive. Don’t be a dick. Stuff like that.
Not to mention, there’s a feeling of accomplishment and gratitude that comes with getting shit done. It’s like cleaning a boat - it ain’t easy, but damn that motherfucker looks good when it’s done.
[quote]polo77j wrote:
I love the deconstruction of the article. Here is this man who is giving what amounts to meta-advice. Advice that is meant for the aggregate of the unmotivated. Now we have people who are saying “this isn’t necessarily so because…” and then go on to give an anecdote about their experience with a fraction of a percent which is the exact opposite of the point of the article.
[/quote]
Nope the article is wrong - because the author is a sheltered tool.
“Either you will go about the task of seeing to those needs by learning a unique set of skills, or the world will reject you, no matter how kind, giving and polite you are. You will be poor, you will be alone, you will be left out in the cold.”
The first point alone illustrates how stupid his point is. Yes you will be poor, alone and out in the cold if you have no marketeable skills (although Kim Kardashian seems to get by fine, but whatever). However, the flipside is also possible: that you could be poor, alone and out in the cold if you DO have marketeable skills - but are an asshole.
See, in the real world, being a nice guy DOES fulfill a need in society. [/quote]
He never said you need to be an asshole, but you DO need to get shit done. [/quote]
Why?
[/quote]
Fair question. I guess you don’t ACTUALLY have to get shit done. You bring up a very valid point that all you have to do in life is die.
For me, however, I want to do shit. There was a recent study that discovered that money CAN buy happiness. It said it can be acheived by spending money on experiences, rather than material items. It’s the difference between buying a lamborghini aventador as opposed to buying a lightly used BMW M6 and then using the difference to fly yourself and three of your best friends to Italy and getting a weekend’s worth of driving lessons from a lambo test driver, or something. I’d love to travel to Mexico twice a year and go cave diving in underwater wonder-worlds. I’d love to be able to provide for a woman who I’m incredibly in love with (and our kids if that was a decision we made.) I’d love to be able to tip a waiter/waitress $100 on an evening where he/she might be having a shitty night. I’d love to go skydiving in exotic locations. I’d love to be able to rent a 5-star hotel room for a homeless guy on Christmass eve so he’d have a hot shower and a warm bed to sleep in. I’d love to be able to give back to my community. I’d love to be able to throw extravagant, kick ass parties with friends in my extravagant, kick ass house while wearing extravagant, kick ass three peice suits. I’d love to be able to grab some friends and take a weekend trip on an offshore sailing trip on my beautiful Hylas 54.
In all reality, I’d still be happy doing a fraction of awesome stuff like that in life, but even doing a fraction of that awesome stuff costs money. And unless you’re a trust fund baby, in order to earn money, you gotta get shit done.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with material items and dreaming big as long as you keep things in perspective. Don’t sacrafice family time, personal relationships, sanity, or happiness in order for 70+ hour work weeks. Stay humble. Think positive. Don’t be a dick. Stuff like that.
Not to mention, there’s a feeling of accomplishment and gratitude that comes with getting shit done. It’s like cleaning a boat - it ain’t easy, but damn that motherfucker looks good when it’s done.[/quote]
Would you be unhappy if you couldn’t do any of the things you mentioned? Honestly what’s the difference between sitting at home and sky diving other than a state of mind. If you can’t be happy sitting at home by yourself doing nothing everything else you do is just a quick burst of thrill.
What I am trying to get at, that none of the stuff mentioned on that article will actually make you happy until you are happy with whom you are as you are now. I believe angry chicken re-iterates this quite often. You don’t have to be the best sales man, or make the most amount of money, or be married with kids. If you want to function in society you will have to suffer like the article says, but let’s face it, most of society is depressed, angry, going nowhere, always wondering why they aren’t happy. Just because everyone else is doing it, doesn’t mean it’s the right way.
[quote]polo77j wrote:
I love the deconstruction of the article. Here is this man who is giving what amounts to meta-advice. Advice that is meant for the aggregate of the unmotivated. Now we have people who are saying “this isn’t necessarily so because…” and then go on to give an anecdote about their experience with a fraction of a percent which is the exact opposite of the point of the article.
[/quote]
Nope the article is wrong - because the author is a sheltered tool.
“Either you will go about the task of seeing to those needs by learning a unique set of skills, or the world will reject you, no matter how kind, giving and polite you are. You will be poor, you will be alone, you will be left out in the cold.”
The first point alone illustrates how stupid his point is. Yes you will be poor, alone and out in the cold if you have no marketeable skills (although Kim Kardashian seems to get by fine, but whatever). However, the flipside is also possible: that you could be poor, alone and out in the cold if you DO have marketeable skills - but are an asshole.
See, in the real world, being a nice guy DOES fulfill a need in society. [/quote]
Thing is, you can succeed as an asshole with a necessary skill set, but you cannot do the opposite, and succeed as just a nice guy without any useful skill set. So the point is, get off your ass and learn to do something. Many, many, many do not. I didn’t until I was 26, then I turned my whole life around because I finally figured out exactly the points this guy makes in his article. [/quote]
What happened when you are 26 if you don’t mind me asking?
[quote]polo77j wrote:
I love the deconstruction of the article. Here is this man who is giving what amounts to meta-advice. Advice that is meant for the aggregate of the unmotivated. Now we have people who are saying “this isn’t necessarily so because…” and then go on to give an anecdote about their experience with a fraction of a percent which is the exact opposite of the point of the article.
[/quote]
Nope the article is wrong - because the author is a sheltered tool.
“Either you will go about the task of seeing to those needs by learning a unique set of skills, or the world will reject you, no matter how kind, giving and polite you are. You will be poor, you will be alone, you will be left out in the cold.”
The first point alone illustrates how stupid his point is. Yes you will be poor, alone and out in the cold if you have no marketeable skills (although Kim Kardashian seems to get by fine, but whatever). However, the flipside is also possible: that you could be poor, alone and out in the cold if you DO have marketeable skills - but are an asshole.
See, in the real world, being a nice guy DOES fulfill a need in society. [/quote]
He never said you need to be an asshole, but you DO need to get shit done. [/quote]
Why?
[/quote]
Fair question. I guess you don’t ACTUALLY have to get shit done. You bring up a very valid point that all you have to do in life is die.
For me, however, I want to do shit. There was a recent study that discovered that money CAN buy happiness. It said it can be acheived by spending money on experiences, rather than material items. It’s the difference between buying a lamborghini aventador as opposed to buying a lightly used BMW M6 and then using the difference to fly yourself and three of your best friends to Italy and getting a weekend’s worth of driving lessons from a lambo test driver, or something. I’d love to travel to Mexico twice a year and go cave diving in underwater wonder-worlds. I’d love to be able to provide for a woman who I’m incredibly in love with (and our kids if that was a decision we made.) I’d love to be able to tip a waiter/waitress $100 on an evening where he/she might be having a shitty night. I’d love to go skydiving in exotic locations. I’d love to be able to rent a 5-star hotel room for a homeless guy on Christmass eve so he’d have a hot shower and a warm bed to sleep in. I’d love to be able to give back to my community. I’d love to be able to throw extravagant, kick ass parties with friends in my extravagant, kick ass house while wearing extravagant, kick ass three peice suits. I’d love to be able to grab some friends and take a weekend trip on an offshore sailing trip on my beautiful Hylas 54.
In all reality, I’d still be happy doing a fraction of awesome stuff like that in life, but even doing a fraction of that awesome stuff costs money. And unless you’re a trust fund baby, in order to earn money, you gotta get shit done.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with material items and dreaming big as long as you keep things in perspective. Don’t sacrafice family time, personal relationships, sanity, or happiness in order for 70+ hour work weeks. Stay humble. Think positive. Don’t be a dick. Stuff like that.
Not to mention, there’s a feeling of accomplishment and gratitude that comes with getting shit done. It’s like cleaning a boat - it ain’t easy, but damn that motherfucker looks good when it’s done.[/quote]
Would you be unhappy if you couldn’t do any of the things you mentioned? Honestly what’s the difference between sitting at home and sky diving other than a state of mind. If you can’t be happy sitting at home by yourself doing nothing everything else you do is just a quick burst of thrill.
What I am trying to get at, that none of the stuff mentioned on that article will actually make you happy until you are happy with whom you are as you are now. I believe angry chicken re-iterates this quite often. You don’t have to be the best sales man, or make the most amount of money, or be married with kids. If you want to function in society you will have to suffer like the article says, but let’s face it, most of society is depressed, angry, going nowhere, always wondering why they aren’t happy. Just because everyone else is doing it, doesn’t mean it’s the right way.
Good post by the way.[/quote]
The article mentions that actually, I’m fairly sure it was in the ‘nice guy’ section. The nice guy may be nice, but he still is clearly unhappy with himself. This is evidenced by his bitter reactions to rejection for what he perceives as being ‘nice,’ which is USUALLY him being disingenuous and hoping that fulfulling a gap of ‘nice’ in people’s(women’s) lives is worth more to them than other shit he could give, because he lacks confidence in that other shit. The author directly addresses this saying that instead of thinking to yourself ‘I’m a nice guy, I do things other guys don’t,’ go act upon those thoughts and SHOW people(women) that you actually do offer things other guys don’t, and that you are actually nice and not trying to exploit a perception of nice for ‘a chance to smell her and daydream about how soft her skin might be’(from memory, might not be the exact quote used).
So yes, the article is about liking yourself first and foremost, but liking yourself is most likely going to come about as a factor of you providing VALUE(not just monetarily) to others; validation shouldn’t be what you strive for, but it should be an aftereffect of your efforts. The guy who is a good father and goes home to play with his kids can be VERY valuable, to his kids, his wife, etc. If that man is perfectly happy doing that, then he won’t mind being fired for not being a cutthroat real-estate agent who refuses to give up his evenings with the wife and kids, and there is nothing wrong with that.
[quote]Hellfrost wrote:
Would you be unhappy if you couldn’t do any of the things you mentioned? Honestly what’s the difference between sitting at home and sky diving other than a state of mind. If you can’t be happy sitting at home by yourself doing nothing everything else you do is just a quick burst of thrill.
[/quote]
I think we’re more on the same page than we think, despite the fact that I’m about to disagree with the following, hah:
I do disagree with “everything else you do is just a quick burst of thrill.” It is a quick burst of thrill, but those quick bursts of thrills add up to awesome memories, being able to look back and reflect on those memories, realizing what a fulfilling life you’ve had, and combining that with the fact you realize that you’ve got the ability to get more shit done in order to have more quick thrills (leading to more awesome memories), will lead to happiness. (IMO) It’s certainly the case in my experience, and for someone my age, I’ve been lucky enough to have quite a few awesome experiences, and looking back on them often makes me smile. Similarly, I’ve had quite a few awful experiences, but I look back on those and the sweet memories just seem that much sweeter. (Sunny days and all that…)
And I do think there’s a huge difference between going out and getting shit done (be it “getting shit done” or going skydiving for enjoyment) and sitting at home.
Sitting at home, doing nothing, even if you’re the most self-esteemed human being on earth, will eventually lead you an unhealthy state of mind, I’d bet. No meaningful social interaction, no “fun”, little direct sunlight, no sense of meaningful acheivment, etc… That shit turns into a (negative) positive reinforcement loop (I think it’s been mentioned, or alluded to, in this thread by Cortes) of “I haven’t achieved anything (be it an education, meaningful relationships, health, happiness, wealth, money) → I’m a loser → Losers do loser things → doing loser things means I’m a loser → why bother even trying to achieve something? I’m a loser… → I’m a loser → depression/poor self esteem” and so on and so forth. That shit aint healthy.
On the contrary, going out and getting shit done will lead to a (positive) positive reinforcement loop in the opposite direction. "I’m a motherfuckin’ winner > I get shit done → if I got that shit done, I can get more shit done → getting shit done/realizing I’m capable of getting shit done → more self esteem → greater self esteem → getting shit done → getting shit done EARNED me X amount of money last year → I earned X amount of money because of the hard work I put into my life → I’ve accomplished getting shit done because of said hard work → I earned X amount of money without selling my soul or fucking someone else over for said money, at that → with the money I’ve earned, I’ve earned the priveledge of indulging in life → indulging in life (whether indulging in life means going out and spending 25k on a weekend in Vegas or sitting at home scratching your balls while playing video games on a 23 inch TV, it’s your sense of indulgence) → I have the ability to have fun → life is fun → but it’s also not easy (this is where maintaining a healthy perspective comes into play) → I gotta get shit done → I have the ability to get shit done → the realization that the world is your motherfuckin’ oyster (be it material items, meaningful relationships, happiness, etc…)
I kind of agree with your first sentence, but also kind of disagree. You are probably right about the fact that that’s probably what AC would say. I’ve actually done most of the readings/work that AC recommended (over the course of numerous threads) within the past year or so and it’s profoundly changed my life for the better. As long as I maintain my healthy mental state (ie, sense of happiness, self-worth, gratitude, humility, and WEALTH - not to be confused with money), why can’t money be used to improve the quality of one’s life? I’d argue that, if you think retiring early (because you have the financial means to) will give you more time before you die to do shit that makes you happy, you’ll be happier on your death bed than if you had to wait 10 more years working before you get to do more shit that makes you happy. Or, if you want to retire at the “regular” age, but take more vacation time, spend more money on indulgences earlier in life (again, because you have the financial means to), you’ll still be happier on your death bed.
On the other hand, getting back to your first sentence (in this quoted bit), I feel that a lot of these people aren’t happy with themselves because they’re bitching and moaning in a similar fashion to what the articles author mentions (my boss can’t talk to me like that, DOES HE KNOW WHO I AM?!) That’s a false sense of entitlement. Your boss can talk to you however he or she damn well pleases. He’s got that ability because he’s your boss, and he’s your boss because he’s gotten more shit done than you have. Of course, you have the ability to quit - but that would involve getting more shit done (like appkying for a new job with a nicer boss.) You’re more than welcome to quit and be your own boss, but that takes more getting shit done and well… that’s like… hard. Wahh. People just know it’s much easier to go to work every day and put up with said shitty boss and then complain about him behind his back than it is to tell that motherfucker to fuck off, quit, and change your life for the better (ie, GET SHIT DONE.) Similarly to what Pat (I think it was) said, no one give’s a flying fuck about your pathetic life and they sure as shit don’t want to hear about you bitch and moan about said pathetic little life, which will eventually lead to lost friendships, which is another reinforcement to the (negative) positive reinforcement loop mentioned above.
You are entitled to very little in life (and even then, I’m not so sure I’m convinced of even that), but everyone thinks they are entitled to an easy life that’s riddled with extravagant indulgences. You’re not even entitled to happiness. “Life, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness, motherfucker.” (I may have paraphrased that a bit.) You’re entitled to get up off your ass and EARN that happiness, make that shit happen… which is synonymous with “getting shit done.” Despite this unfortunate fact that you’re entitled to very little, you, fortunately, have the ability to grab life by the balls and EARN whatever it is the fuck you want (happiness, health, money, wealth, meaningful relationships, women, etc). We see this sense of entitlement everyday in society. Having a sense of entitlement is an unhealthy outlook on life. Like the author said, the world allows us to keep failing, and constantly failing leads to the (negative) positive reinforcement loop I mentioned above. Even worse, it’s easy to keep failing and even easier to give up. It’s difficult to keep failing and bust your ass until you finally get shit done (ie, succeed.) Hard work leads to getting shit done, and getting shit done leads to the (positive) positive reinforcement loop mentioned above.
I feel a lot like the author is saying: “Despite what society and your parents make you think, you’re not entitled to whatever you want. You ARE entitled to get up off your ass and make that shit happen, though. Ready, break.”
I find it funny you’re taking a “happiness is more important than materialism” stance, given that you were driving a ferrari before you were legally allowed to drink. Just kiddin’
Also, I want a dog in my life until the day I die. And Fido’s gotta eat. That means I gotta get shit done and bring home the bacon [bits.]
Ironically enough, this just showed up on my facebook news feed:
Bill Gates recently gave a Commencement speech at a High School about 11 things they did not and will not learn in school. He talks about how feel-good, politically correct teachings created a generation of kids with no concept of reality and how this concept set them up for failure in the real world.
Rule 1: Life is not fair - get used to it!
Rule 2: The world won’t care about your self-esteem. The world will expect you to accomplish something BEFORE you feel good about yourself.
Rule 3: You will NOT make $60,000 a year right out of high school. You won’t be a vice-president with a car phone until you earn both.
Rule 4: If you think your teacher is tough, wait till you get a boss.
Rule 5: Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity. Your Grandparents had a different word for burger flipping: they called it opportunity.
Rule 6: If you mess up, it’s not your parents’ fault, so don’t whine about your mistakes; learn from them.
Rule 7: Before you were born, your parents weren’t as boring as they are now. They got that way from paying your bills, cleaning your clothes and listening to you talk about how cool you thought you were. So before you save the rain forest from the parasites of your parent’s generation, try delousing the closet in your own room.
Rule 8: Your school may have done away with winners and losers, but life HAS NOT. In some schools, they have abolished failing grades and they’ll give you as MANY TIMES as you want to get the right answer. This doesn’t bear the slightest resemblance to ANYTHING in real life.
Rule 9: Life is not divided into semesters. You don’t get summers off and very few employers are interested in helping you FIND YOURSELF. Do that on your own time.
Rule 10: Television is NOT real life. In real life people actually have to leave the coffee shop and go to jobs.
Rule 11: Be nice to nerds. Chances are you’ll end up working for one.
[quote]polo77j wrote:
I love the deconstruction of the article. Here is this man who is giving what amounts to meta-advice. Advice that is meant for the aggregate of the unmotivated. Now we have people who are saying “this isn’t necessarily so because…” and then go on to give an anecdote about their experience with a fraction of a percent which is the exact opposite of the point of the article.
[/quote]
Nope the article is wrong - because the author is a sheltered tool.
“Either you will go about the task of seeing to those needs by learning a unique set of skills, or the world will reject you, no matter how kind, giving and polite you are. You will be poor, you will be alone, you will be left out in the cold.”
The first point alone illustrates how stupid his point is. Yes you will be poor, alone and out in the cold if you have no marketeable skills (although Kim Kardashian seems to get by fine, but whatever). However, the flipside is also possible: that you could be poor, alone and out in the cold if you DO have marketeable skills - but are an asshole.
See, in the real world, being a nice guy DOES fulfill a need in society. [/quote]
He never said you need to be an asshole, but you DO need to get shit done. [/quote]
Why?
[/quote]
I suspect you’re engaged in some undergraduate attempt at philosophical depth. The thing is without something to work toward, some contribution to society, or creating something, man can be neither happy nor satisfied. Now you can argue that all that’s not important, but I have a very hard time believing you actually live in a manner that reflects what you think you’re saying. One book that perfectly illustrates this principle is Victor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning. Frankl is a concentration camp survivor. The book is based upon his observations of who lived and who died in the death camp. He noted that those who had someone to take care of, or who possessed some sense of purpose were the ones who tended to live the longest; while those who tended to die most quickly were the ones who had given up or had decided that there was no hope, or nothing to live for.
While this may appear obvious on its face, it has repercussions in everything we do. People who have no purpose, who contribute nothing to society, who create nothing, who do nothing, can wallow in physical stimulation, can be given any man of money, any amount of physical pleasure, but they’re never going to be happy. Whereas those who are actively adding value to their communities and possess a higher purpose are going to be happy no matter what. However, the big payoff is this: Members of this latter group tend to be the most successful monetarily, and have an innate sense of satisfaction and happiness.
I think there is something to the idea that [believing one is] contributing to the herd leads to happiness but there are a wide range of interpretations of contributions and you only have to convince yourself. But others might shatter your illusions if you’re such an ass.
Being a CEO might be by definition successful and might be seen as making a contribution but you’re still going to be miserable if you know that you are a ruthless ass who makes others suffer. If you either don’t do that or are blind to that well happiness may be yours.
You have to contribute–but in a way that convinces you that you’ve done your part.
[quote]debraD wrote:
I think there is something to the idea that [believing one is] contributing to the herd leads to happiness but there are a wide range of interpretations of contributions and you only have to convince yourself. But others might shatter your illusions if you’re such an ass.
Being a CEO might be by definition successful and might be seen as making a contribution but you’re still going to be miserable if you know that you are a ruthless ass who makes others suffer. If you either don’t do that or are blind to that well happiness may be yours.
You have to contribute–but in a way that convinces you that you’ve done your part.
[/quote]
Totally agree. And you will know. Unless you are a sociopath devoid of a conscience, you will know.
[quote]Otis Rush wrote:
So we should all strive to become corporate wage slaves that reduces all human interaction to: “what’s in it for me?”
He raises a few interesting points, but his #1 point has no purpose other than to reinforce his bias. [/quote]
I think you misunderstood the article. He was more so saying that we shouldn’t look to the world to make us feel special just because we are who we are. He also never said just go into the corporate world. Skimming doesn’t count as reading. [/quote]
I didn’t misunderstand anything. His central message boils down to: you need to offer value to people, and you need to be a person of action.
That as a standalone would be acceptable, but it’s mired in his own personal bullshit. What does the message of his favorite glengarry speech convey? That a person’s measure of worth is bound up in how much money they can earn for themselves and their employers. Wong goes on to say: “Your job-the useful thing you do for other people-is all you are.” Then finishes by saying it’s a mechanism of the universe, and nothing can be done about it. [/quote]
It’s not who you are. It’s who you are to other people. Most people don’t care that you’re a nice guy, and that is how the world works. What I understood that the author was saying was that you can be whoever you want to be, but just don’t complain that people don’t understand “the real you” if you are not doing anything.
[quote]Otis Rush wrote:
So we should all strive to become corporate wage slaves that reduces all human interaction to: “what’s in it for me?”
He raises a few interesting points, but his #1 point has no purpose other than to reinforce his bias. [/quote]
I think you misunderstood the article. He was more so saying that we shouldn’t look to the world to make us feel special just because we are who we are. He also never said just go into the corporate world. Skimming doesn’t count as reading. [/quote]
I didn’t misunderstand anything. His central message boils down to: you need to offer value to people, and you need to be a person of action.
That as a standalone would be acceptable, but it’s mired in his own personal bullshit. What does the message of his favorite glengarry speech convey? That a person’s measure of worth is bound up in how much money they can earn for themselves and their employers. Wong goes on to say: “Your job-the useful thing you do for other people-is all you are.” Then finishes by saying it’s a mechanism of the universe, and nothing can be done about it. [/quote]
It’s not who you are. It’s who you are to other people. Most people don’t care that you’re a nice guy, and that is how the world works. What I understood that the author was saying was that you can be whoever you want to be, but just don’t complain that people don’t understand “the real you” if you are not doing anything. [/quote]
Exactly. Not sure what is so difficult about this.
[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
Ironically enough, this just showed up on my facebook news feed:
Bill Gates recently gave a Commencement speech at a High School about 11 things they did not and will not learn in school. He talks about how feel-good, politically correct teachings created a generation of kids with no concept of reality and how this concept set them up for failure in the real world.
Rule 1: Life is not fair - get used to it!
Rule 2: The world won’t care about your self-esteem. The world will expect you to accomplish something BEFORE you feel good about yourself.
Rule 3: You will NOT make $60,000 a year right out of high school. You won’t be a vice-president with a car phone until you earn both.
Rule 4: If you think your teacher is tough, wait till you get a boss.
Rule 5: Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity. Your Grandparents had a different word for burger flipping: they called it opportunity.
Rule 6: If you mess up, it’s not your parents’ fault, so don’t whine about your mistakes; learn from them.
Rule 7: Before you were born, your parents weren’t as boring as they are now. They got that way from paying your bills, cleaning your clothes and listening to you talk about how cool you thought you were. So before you save the rain forest from the parasites of your parent’s generation, try delousing the closet in your own room.
Rule 8: Your school may have done away with winners and losers, but life HAS NOT. In some schools, they have abolished failing grades and they’ll give you as MANY TIMES as you want to get the right answer. This doesn’t bear the slightest resemblance to ANYTHING in real life.
Rule 9: Life is not divided into semesters. You don’t get summers off and very few employers are interested in helping you FIND YOURSELF. Do that on your own time.
Rule 10: Television is NOT real life. In real life people actually have to leave the coffee shop and go to jobs.
Rule 11: Be nice to nerds. Chances are you’ll end up working for one. [/quote]
Those are great rules. If more students were taught these things BEFORE they learned anything else it would go a long way not only to improving potential and focusing one’s strengths, but to helping people learn how to be happy, satisfied and successful. Right now we have a society that forces kids to spend 1/3 of their most important years in an artificial environment that, in most cases, does little to prepare them for what they are going to have to deal with in the real world. Very frustrating.
The article was a bit strident, and I don’t like Glengarry, but the basic point is right.
You have to get shit done and offer value to people. That doesn’t mean you have to be the best, but you have to be competent. You have to able to do your damn job. You may not have to be a star at it–I’ll work with a competent person that isn’t a raging douche over a very good person that is–but you have to be able to do it. I WILL take a douchebag over an incompetent if those are my two choices. In my personal life, I won’t deal with dickbags but I don’t hang around milquetoast people that have nothing to offer conversationally and do nothing interesting. There’s no point.
I think the Glengarry speech is a bit sociopathic yes, and it is damn sure brutal but it’s basically right.
I don’t think it’s true that companies don’t care what you have done–pretty much everywhere I’ve worked people with proven track records get some more slack on smaller stuff than new people do.
For instance, I’ve been at my job for 5 years and built up a lot of credibility–so the fact I’ve been out a lot this month due to illness hasn’t really rankled them because they know that A: I’m still doing some remote work to keep up the bare minimum and B: that I’ll land with both feet and kick ass when I get back in the day after Christmas. A brand new hire might not get the same treatment.
For instance, I’ve been at my job for 5 years and built up a lot of credibility–so the fact I’ve been out a lot this month due to illness hasn’t really rankled them because they know that A: I’m still doing some remote work to keep up the bare minimum and B: that I’ll land with both feet and kick ass when I get back in the day after Christmas. A brand new hire might not get the same treatment.
[/quote]
I always pour forth every ounce of effort I have with a new job. Especially if it’s something new I’m not used to.
[quote]polo77j wrote:
I love the deconstruction of the article. Here is this man who is giving what amounts to meta-advice. Advice that is meant for the aggregate of the unmotivated. Now we have people who are saying “this isn’t necessarily so because…” and then go on to give an anecdote about their experience with a fraction of a percent which is the exact opposite of the point of the article.
[/quote]
Nope the article is wrong - because the author is a sheltered tool.
“Either you will go about the task of seeing to those needs by learning a unique set of skills, or the world will reject you, no matter how kind, giving and polite you are. You will be poor, you will be alone, you will be left out in the cold.”
The first point alone illustrates how stupid his point is. Yes you will be poor, alone and out in the cold if you have no marketeable skills (although Kim Kardashian seems to get by fine, but whatever). However, the flipside is also possible: that you could be poor, alone and out in the cold if you DO have marketeable skills - but are an asshole.
See, in the real world, being a nice guy DOES fulfill a need in society. [/quote]
He never said you need to be an asshole, but you DO need to get shit done. [/quote]
Why?
[/quote]
Wouldn’t you agree that it would be somewhat unrealistic to be completely happy with your life if all you did was …nothing?
Who you are is defined by what you do, no? So to be happy with who you are, you need to be happy with the things you are doing.
I think there is only a very small portion of people that are physiologically capable of being happy doing absolutely fucking nothing.
[quote]polo77j wrote:
I love the deconstruction of the article. Here is this man who is giving what amounts to meta-advice. Advice that is meant for the aggregate of the unmotivated. Now we have people who are saying “this isn’t necessarily so because…” and then go on to give an anecdote about their experience with a fraction of a percent which is the exact opposite of the point of the article.
[/quote]
Nope the article is wrong - because the author is a sheltered tool.
“Either you will go about the task of seeing to those needs by learning a unique set of skills, or the world will reject you, no matter how kind, giving and polite you are. You will be poor, you will be alone, you will be left out in the cold.”
The first point alone illustrates how stupid his point is. Yes you will be poor, alone and out in the cold if you have no marketeable skills (although Kim Kardashian seems to get by fine, but whatever). However, the flipside is also possible: that you could be poor, alone and out in the cold if you DO have marketeable skills - but are an asshole.
See, in the real world, being a nice guy DOES fulfill a need in society. [/quote]
He never said you need to be an asshole, but you DO need to get shit done. [/quote]
Why?
[/quote]
Wouldn’t you agree that it would be somewhat unrealistic to be completely happy with your life if all you did was …nothing?
Who you are is defined by what you do, no? So to be happy with who you are, you need to be happy with the things you are doing.
I think there is only a very small portion of people that are physiologically capable of being happy doing absolutely fucking nothing.
[/quote]
