"Partly what you need to do is decide what your highest value is. It's the star. What are you aiming for? You can decide. But there are some criteria. It should be good for you in a way that facilitates your moving forward. Maybe it should be good for you in a way that's also good for your family, as well as for the larger community. It should cover the domain of life. There's constraints on what you should regard as a value, but within those constraints you have the choice. You have choice. The thing is that people will carry a heavy load if they get to pick the load. And they think, 'well, I won't carry any load.' Ok, fine, but then you'll be like the sled dog that has nothing to pull. You'll get bored. People are pack animals. They need to pull against a wait. And that's not true for everyone. It's not true for conscientious people. For the typical person, they'll eat themselves up unless they have a load. This is why there's such an opiate epidemic among so many dispossessed white, middle aged, unemployed men in the U.S. They lose their job, and then they're done. They despise themselves. They develop chronic pain syndromes and depression. And the chronic pain is treated with opiates. That's what we're doing. And you should watch when you talk to young men about responsibility. They're so thrilled about it. It just blows me away. Really?! That's what the counter-culture is? Grow up and do something useful. Really? I can do that? Oh, I'm so excited by that idea. No one ever mentioned that before. Rights, rights, rights, rights. Jesus. It's appalling. People have had enough of that. And they better have, because it's a non-productive mode of being. Responsibility, man. That's where the meaning in life is." --Jordan B Peterson
> But the idea that many folks make an affirmative choice not to seems pretty far down the totem pole.
That's not really the point he was making. People internalize a lot of behaviours and beliefs that limit their realized potential. It doesn't require a conscious choice to limit yourself, it takes a bunch of internal, unproductive thoughts and emotions and decisions that sabotage you even though you may not be entirely aware of it.
> everything seems to indicate that there will always be something to improve, so if everyone was driven like this, nobody would be left to enjoy the fruits of these sacrifices, making them ultimately pointless.
I agree. But to me, this is not a dichotomy. As in, you don't have to choose between complete comfort (do your job and watch movies) and total sacrifice (devote all your time to a cause). You can have time for friends and hobbies and still do great good for your community and the larger society.
> If you spend an hour thinking about how you suck at various aspects of your life, how is it making you feel?
It doesn't matter how you feel about it. You need to focus on the bad things in life if you want to have a chance of improving things. Burying your head in the sand doesn't solve anything. Don't waste your time focussing on the good stuff, it doesn't need fixing.
If all you want to do is feel good despite everything around you being shit, why not just do heroin ? You'll feel great and it's a lot less effort than convincing yourself that black is white.
>If you just want to 'feel good', you could start a heroin habit; you will FEEL great. But is that a satisfying and full life?
I don't know, but I would facetiously guess that yes, it probably feels like it is. Until you stop being able to afford more heroin, at which point no, it absolutely would not. Kind of like driving fast; it isn't the speed that kills you, it's the sudden stop.
Happiness and meaning probably look like different things to different people, though. Some people find fulfillment in offspring, sure. But I don't see how that's any different from anything else that works to assuage someone's existential malaise.
>To my eye, the real problem is finding the correct perspective -- the one at which an optimum lies at an extreme.
Something which has brought a lot of happiness to my life and dramatically changed the way I live is taking responsibility for my own happiness and life choices. I used to spin my wheels and drift through life but at 30 I was diagnosed with cancer. It's a long story and it turned out to not be serious, although I did have two surgeries. There was a time period where it seemed very serious, however, and this period completely changed how I view my own life. I didn't want to die with this sense of being so unfulfilled and I wished I had made better choices. Now I try to make these choices as I live.
> people's conditions are contingent on forces largely out of their control. That's a factual statement.
It is a factual statement, I agree, but in the US it is not true. Peoples' lives are the sum of their choices, large and small. One can choose to learn how to make better choices.
I spent a significant portion of every day learning to make better choices and doing things that will improve my life. Such as exercising. Improving my diet. Trying to eliminate unproductive behaviors. Etc.
> Nature is brutal, and if I am not among the best, I'm going to experience pain.
Working so hard to get into the 1% is also very painful. Looks like, in your philosophy, pain is inevitable, and you only get to choose which form of it you take.
> No, you are being influenced by media, which convinces you that things are a proxy for happiness and good relationships
The Fight Club line has always really resonated with me:
"We work jobs we hate to buy shit we don't need"
Live below your means. Tune out from all the consumerism. Suddenly you find that you have enough savings built up that you could support yourself for multiple years without working. Now you are no longer willing to put up with as much at work. Oddly, this builds a sort of respect from people and they bother you less. Now you have excellent work life balance and more than you could ever want.
And really the key to it all is just not wanting so much.
(Also try to keep the freak-accident / illness destroying your life type stuff out your mind.)
>The core issue remains: if you don't have a plan for your life, society will make a plan for you.
You only plan to choose various plans society has for you. There is no plan that is viable out of society’s general direction, if you participate in any constructive way.
Seneca, Socrates and many others were just a tip of the iceberg, and they quickly go underwater, when that iceberg decided to flip or crack. It is okay to achieve others goals if you get paid enough and do not have to constantly fight (iow carry huge risks) through your life.
Their perspective is useful, in a way Jocko Willink motivation videos are useful, but you don’t really go to a full-blown war after watching these, nor are you ready for it.
> We all have to make the choice between prioritizing creature comforts and freedom.
Of course, this starts from the assumption that work is inherently an undesirable activity and that conversely, pleasurable activities are incompatible w/ work. IMHO, it's not necessarily black and white: it's certainly possible to find satisfaction/fulfillment in one's work (to the extent that some people even choose to work despite not having the financial need to). Personally, I try to find alignment between being a "productive member of society" and deriving happiness from my efforts (both in terms of my work output as well as material gain). I'm sure much more can be said about the drivers of motivation as it relates to finding the meaning of one's life, and the whole thing about life being about the journey, rather than the destination.
In terms of financial independence, I'd be wary of the word "freedom". It can be quite the loaded term, in the sense that one could equally argue that greatly restricting expenditure is "slavery to a run rate", whereas a steady income and a more lavish budget is "liberating". For someone like me who seeks well-roundedness, loaded terms irk me. Though to be clear, I'm not criticizing one lifestyle over another; both FIRE and career-ladder lifestyles are perfectly fine life choices IMHO.
> And that same mentality is very often the way we bring up children. Play it safe. Get a good job. Prioritize work over your own desires. Sacrifice yourself for others. And whatever you do, make sure it goes well.
It's always been that way. Self-sacrifice is a common theme in religions and cultures. The idea that life should be a pursuit of pleasure is very modern.
>> > Sure, some people choose to rot at the level they're at, but most people want to have ALL their needs met, and will keep climbing.
> I don't agree with this.
You don't? Interesting, can you provide examples?
Myself, I don't know many (sane/rational) people who...
1) Don't want to eat, have shelter, or sleep.
2) Don't want to be secure in their persons, be employed, have money and be healthy
3) Don't want any friends/lovers/family.
4) Don't care about themselves, don't want to be respected, and hate freedom.
5) Have never studied or practiced or otherwise put effort into improving themselves or learning anything new in their entire life.
On the other hand, I have seen people of many different professions all fill in this hierarchy in their own way : eg. Farmers, programmers, truck drivers, airline pilots, industrial machine operators, mechanics, driving instructors, used car salesmen, bankers, managers, professors, train conductors... etc. Though every person is a bit different and thus their needs, wants, and ambitions, and their means of achieving them will differ too.
All these professions pretty much demand that you are constantly working up to the self-actualization level. (If only to keep up with the continuous march of progress.)
Perhaps you know people in some of these professions (or others) too?
> a society that forces people into self medication of all forms
From personal experience, I believe it's not society forcing anything, but a character flaw that encourages self-gratification in the short term. That flaw can be bypassed, don't give up if you're not happy about it.
> I am talking about the need to feel whole, Desire itself. The idea that some moments can make you feel like life is beautiful, moments where you feel you can die right then and it would all be worth it.
That feeling comes from dopamine. If you actually believe that feeling is better than actually living to experience that feeling again in the future, a heroin dealer will be more than happy to help you out.
> but you simply think that humans should change fundamentally.
Only in that they should be more rational. I don't think that is an onerous request. Many people already try to be.
> The fact that there's the idea that you can enjoy life, is a huge sign of privilege
Honestly, I think it's a simple logical realization. Most people happen to be smart enough to see that life can and could be enjoyed and lived, we've long outpaced animals and survival now involves much more our self organizing then anything else.
Basically, the biggest obstacle to one enjoying life and one surviving is other people. You're absolutely entitled to take that opportunity and demand of others better.
Live free or die. Entitlement isn't just about whining, it's the inherent resistence to a society that isn't logical about giving you your fair share, and working towards the common good of our specie.
That entitlement is the will to survive, and it's the reason people want to survive, so that they can enjoy life.
And if you go looking in history, you'll see it everywhere, people fighting because they believe they deserve better and because they logically see that better is feasible.
> There is an unimaginable amount of suffering in this world. Around 150,000
people die each day. About 5 million children die each year. Millions of
people are maimed or killed by accident, disease, and violence.
Considering this man's talents, I would much rather live in a world where
he devoted himself to solving important problems. I realize he wouldn't be
as happy, but the expected value in lives saved is quite high.
Most human suffering isn't just solved by smart people thinking hard about solving some problems.
Most human suffering is caused by missing compassion for people.
> I've chosen a career geared toward maximizing my benefit to others, not my own happiness.
Sorry, but I don't think that's the case. You're doing what you do,
because it feels right for you, so in a way you can't get happier by
doing something else.
You might not follow the hedonistic path, but you're still doing what
makes you most happy.
"Partly what you need to do is decide what your highest value is. It's the star. What are you aiming for? You can decide. But there are some criteria. It should be good for you in a way that facilitates your moving forward. Maybe it should be good for you in a way that's also good for your family, as well as for the larger community. It should cover the domain of life. There's constraints on what you should regard as a value, but within those constraints you have the choice. You have choice. The thing is that people will carry a heavy load if they get to pick the load. And they think, 'well, I won't carry any load.' Ok, fine, but then you'll be like the sled dog that has nothing to pull. You'll get bored. People are pack animals. They need to pull against a wait. And that's not true for everyone. It's not true for conscientious people. For the typical person, they'll eat themselves up unless they have a load. This is why there's such an opiate epidemic among so many dispossessed white, middle aged, unemployed men in the U.S. They lose their job, and then they're done. They despise themselves. They develop chronic pain syndromes and depression. And the chronic pain is treated with opiates. That's what we're doing. And you should watch when you talk to young men about responsibility. They're so thrilled about it. It just blows me away. Really?! That's what the counter-culture is? Grow up and do something useful. Really? I can do that? Oh, I'm so excited by that idea. No one ever mentioned that before. Rights, rights, rights, rights. Jesus. It's appalling. People have had enough of that. And they better have, because it's a non-productive mode of being. Responsibility, man. That's where the meaning in life is." --Jordan B Peterson
reply