Tim Ferris-
(paraphrased)
“The quality of your life is directly proportional to the amount of difficult conversations you have made”
Thoughts?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]goochadamg wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
How is a school teacher “mediocre”? That takes a college degree.
That is NOT “mediocre”.
[/quote]
I think mediocrity is defined in context of an individuals potential; how hard are you working based on how hard you’re able to? With that definition, there’s plenty of mediocre students I go to school with (maybe I sometimes fit that bill. Ha!). And plenty of mediocre college professors I go to school with.
I’ve no doubt these mediocre professors I’ve had the pleasure of being taught by are incredibly bright; some even having multiple PhD degrees. However, they’re mediocre teachers simply because they’re not applying themselves as much as they could towards teaching. They’re half-assing it. That’s being mediocre.[/quote]
I don’t think you all understand this topic is fucking pointless as long as some of you keep trying to point out how every fucking career or level of education can be mediocre.
That isn’t the point.
[/quote]
Yes, actually, I agree. It is a pointless topic. 
7 words…
“I dont want to change my body” is what i always get from people who do not push themselves in the gym… pfft
No matter how smart you are, how strong you are, how talented you are, how skilled you are… There will ALWAYS be someone better than you.
I forgot who said that, I think it was Eric Clapton.
[quote]skaz05 wrote:
No matter how smart you are, how strong you are, how talented you are, how skilled you are… There will ALWAYS be someone better than you.
I forgot who said that, I think it was Eric Clapton.[/quote]
I know some of you are being “profound” in the way you are writing, but no one is disagreeing in this thread at all that EVERYONE can be mediocre at something. That is NOT the point and why this thread makes ZERO sense until someone defines what we are specifically talking about.
If I write that a profession STRICTLY IN TERMS OF INCOME is not mediocre due to making a certain amount, it does not need some response that “people with high incomes can be mediocre at things”. That has nothing to do with what I wrote or the point being made.
If I say that most people with high;y skilled jobs would not be considered mediocre AS A PROFESSIONAL IN THAT CAREER CHOICE, it does not need a response that some of those people could be “average” at their profession.
I am also not directing this at you specifically, skaz as I don’t even disagree with what you wrote…just WHY you thought it needed to be said here.
“When you stop trying to better yourself, you become mediocre.”
-me
OK, how many people here will admit to being just mediocre/ordinary in bed?
That admission would make you extraordinary.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
OK, how many people here will admit to being just mediocre/ordinary in bed?
That admission would make you extraordinary.[/quote]
LOL
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
OK, how many people here will admit to being just mediocre/ordinary in bed?
That admission would make you extraordinary.[/quote]
Raises Hand
This why I always try to get better, because i’ll AWAYS think i’m average.
From a purely statistical standpoint, most people are average at most things : )
it’s boring…
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
OK, how many people here will admit to being just mediocre/ordinary in bed?
That admission would make you extraordinary.[/quote]
Many of you married fuckers need to start owning up to this shit.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
“When you stop trying to better yourself, you become mediocre.”
-me[/quote]
I agree.
When you settle for something but you are physically and intellectually capable of more, you are medicore. And lazy.
Some people are not capable of more, due to the hand they have been dealt in life, they do they best the can at their job, life, etc. and while their achievements fianancial or otherwise might not be exemplary, they are NOT mediocre.
So teaching is mediocre? Based on what, salary? I make enough to own a house and a car.
Based on work? Come to my school where statistics say only about 30% of the kids will graduate and try it
Based on relevance? Before I moved here I worked briefly as a missionary in an orphanage near Juarez, Mexico, doesn’t that serve a purpose?
I may be mediocre at a lot of things in life, but I don’t see how my job is more mediocre than someone sitting in an office pushing buttons on a computer even if he does get paid more than me.
you little folk are so cute when you try to assert yourselves.
Isnt it time to pick out new tires at Sears, R?
[quote]BBriere wrote:
So teaching is mediocre? Based on what, salary? I make enough to own a house and a car.
Based on work? Come to my school where statistics say only about 30% of the kids will graduate and try it
Based on relevance? Before I moved here I worked briefly as a missionary in an orphanage near Juarez, Mexico, doesn’t that serve a purpose?
I may be mediocre at a lot of things in life, but I don’t see how my job is more mediocre than someone sitting in an office pushing buttons on a computer even if he does get paid more than me.[/quote]
[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
you little folk are so cute when you try to assert yourselves.
Isnt it time to pick out new tires at Sears, R?
[quote]BBriere wrote:
So teaching is mediocre? Based on what, salary? I make enough to own a house and a car.
Based on work? Come to my school where statistics say only about 30% of the kids will graduate and try it
Based on relevance? Before I moved here I worked briefly as a missionary in an orphanage near Juarez, Mexico, doesn’t that serve a purpose?
I may be mediocre at a lot of things in life, but I don’t see how my job is more mediocre than someone sitting in an office pushing buttons on a computer even if he does get paid more than me.[/quote]
[/quote]
No, my tires are doing fine. How about yours?
I think on some levels we are much to mediocre…to be honest there are so many things we can and should do just plain better but thats not really what I think the deeper question is. At what level are people acceptable?
I think we should define “mediocre” as expendable, i.e. not unique.
Ex. A cashier is generally expendable. The cashier function is important but because of the low barrier to entry for the job, the position is easy to fill.
Ex 2. A great teacher that has students lining up to take a single section of a 7:30 am class, presumably because the teacher is so well-liked (for the quality of their lectures) ? That teacher is not exactly replaceable.
If you provide a particular value to your job function that is NOT a virtue of the job function itself (e.g., a teacher isn’t necessarily great for the material that they teach but HOW they teach the material, which has more to do with their personality and teaching style), then you are likely “valuable” i.e. not easily expendable.
Yes, we are all “expendable” within the context of business/accounting, i.e. when money has to be saved and yours is the highest salary in the department, but definition can always change depending on context and there will always be more than one context by which to analyze something.
[quote]belligerent wrote:
[quote]Sarev0k wrote:
Money has nothing to do with success or mediocrity. I’m sure many of you know a resident lucky dumbass that earns a decent amount of money.
Sucess to me is case sensetive. Lets take some examples:
- Rich Stock Broker/Investor: Earns 3 million dollars average per year by knowledgeably moving around his assets through different marekets, as well as keeping a keen eye on trends, laws, and popular societal movements. Most would consider this career choice as hard, brain caging, and highly stressful. Sucess right?
But the stock broker has 3 kids he never sees, whom are all being raised by a nanny. These kids grow up to resent their father, obtain a drug addiction, and often act out in other ways due to the lack of attention from their parent. The father never retires and still works until he dies, while living a life of luxury. Still successful?
- Factory Worker: This man earns 30,000 - 40,000 dollars a year, depending on how long he is laid off for during slow months. His job is unstable, and he lives paycheck to paycheck. He has no college degree and dropped out of school to join the U.S. Army at 17 years old to serve in WW2. He returns home to the aforementioned job, to which he works the first shift. Mediocre right?
He comes home to a wife and 3 kids every day at 4 o clock, and even though they barely make ends meet, the family is consistently happy. He sees them often, which enables them to go to him for advice and for him to teach them virtue and moral standards. The kids grow up and go to college, each obtaining a career that they envisioned themselves doing. At a certain age, the father retires and has a meager pension, still paycheck to paycheck. Successful?
Success is case sensetive. Perhaps the rich guy thinks he is successful because of his aquired wealth and high standard of living. Perhaps the Middle-class guy thinks he is successful because he is happy with his family and has raised honorable children.[/quote]
This is wrong. It’s a false dichotomy and a false indictment of rich people. How many working class families do you know that are really that happy? I have more respect for parents who work hard and maintain their identities as individuals than parents who give themselves up to become martyrs for their children.
[/quote]
I believe you mistook my examples for something i actually belive in. These are 2 hypothetical yet “sterotypical” scenarios. Notice I never said i prefer the latter over the former, which is obviously what you think that I favor.
Fact is, I know both scenarios in real life and the opposite in real life.
It was written to get a response out of people, and to get people to think about the situation and sacrificing one benefit over another.
If you truly read my post, you would not find it at all saying “All rich people are bad parents” or “All middle-class people are extremely content with their path”.
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
To the Self Help crowd: What’s wrong with being ordinary and mediocre, considering that 99% of the population is ordinary and mediocre physically and intellectually and our society would devolve into chaos and savagery if all we had were a bunch of ambitious, opportunistic, genius, independent, talented people running around?![/quote]
nothing is wrong with it.
providing people are encouraged to eat crap to keep them subdued, provided with a culture of beer, football and celebrity to keep them entertained, supplied with shallow materialistic goals to focus their ambitions, the wheels of the world will continue to turn.
it’s when people start to see beyond this, and become no longer content to just observe it and begin to question, then the problems will start.