Learn to trust yourself
(note: this was taken out of the context, therefore some things may seem a bit... out of the context ;-)
I always trust myself regarding my decisions to blacklist someone. I can forget about the cause of that, since time passes by, and I should focus on other activities. However, if a person is in my blacklist, I am sure it is there for a good reason (because it takes a committee and 5 triple-check operations before somebody is officially blacklisted).
So it is important that you learn to trust your previously made decisions. Of course, sometimes decisions need to be reviewed, because things change with time. However, the need to review decisions can be minimized if you put more thought in the process of taking the decisions in the first place. Know wa I'm sayin'? :-)
I think this was error#1.
Second, people are emotional creatures, so when you see someone make the face of the cat from Shrek2 (you've seen it, da? and you know which moment I refer to), you are of course going to soften yourself - because we're humans. The enemy knows that, and uses this strategy to take advantage of error#1.
Allow me to go on. I am sure that a random and distant person in a chatroom can become a true friend. There are intelligent people all over the place, therefore you should never fallback to the "but we used to be good friends!" argument. I know it sounds rough, but... friends can be replaced. I mean, 'friends' who ended up in a blacklist. Had they been real friends, they wouldn't have gotten blacklisted, right? Simple logic :-)
This brings us back to the starting point - learn to trust yourself and your earlier decisions. I know you can embrace this strategy, because you ARE smart enough to be able to make right decisions. Many cannot adapt this strategy, nor understand it, because they don't have what it takes to be able to make good decisions. Which is why people do stupid things and protect themselves with 'super metaphors' a la "eu traiesc cu ziua de azi", or "traieste repede, savureaza viata", or "if you're slow, you'll miss the show" (I just made this one up :-)
Bla bla bla.. I can't remember the 'best' aphorism which places slow decision-makers in a bad light... but I'm sure you know what I mean.
As we discussed in one of the earlier messages, sometimes we criticize some things, other times we turn them into aphorisms which 'intelligent' people stick to the context every now and then, to show how smart they are :-)
I say we screw them, and do things our way?. However, I have some counter arguments too. Someone has to be the devil's advocate, I'll switch to this later.
Anyway, there's no way to live a prosperous life without making 'slow' decisions, unless you are:
- a 'lucky sanavabici' who is lucky all the time (probabilities tell us this is unlikely)
- always on your parents' neck
- a leech that uses others' resources, fame, connections, means of production, goods, etc
Note: by 'slow' decision I do not mean one that takes long to take; a better way to explain it is via contrast - a fast decision is one made without thinking.
With time, you get the qualification that allows you to make fast and correct decisions :-) (reminds me of "computers make very fast and very accurate errors")
***
> and I realized that I have never been truly happy.... How sad is that?
Well, allow me to join the club.
I have recently thought about this too. What makes things as they are? The fact that we are not too stupid (so that we don't notice existing issues)? The fact that we are too intelligent (so that we see too many problems and try to resolve them all)?
I don't know if you've read the book - Camil Petrescu - "Ultima noapte de dragoste, intiia noapte de razboi". No, I haven't read it :-) But I've read a lot of reviews of it in high-school and followed the discussions in class. It covers "problema intelectualului inadaptat". The world is a cruel place, and if you keep trying to do the right thing all the time - you bump into a great number of barriers, bad people, problems, backstabbers, etc. In a few words - if your intelligence exceeds a certain threshold - you're not going to easily accept all the shit that keeps happening in the world (maybe, fail to accept it at all, and live a difficult life, thinking about how unhappy you are). One solution is to become stupid, but this is a sub-optimal solution, to say the least... Then there's the obvious - change the world to a better place, or die trying (what I am sort of trying to accomplish). As for the other solutions - I am still looking for them :-)
The above paragraph is based on the assumption that I am in the club of those whose intelligence is above the specified threshold. How modest :-) I cannot judge this, this can only be done by an outsider.
Speaking of outsiders, it is possible that we may never find out where the universe came from, nor we will find answers to some of the questions that bother us; because the answers require us to measure some quantities - but when we measure something - we change it. The change may be small, but it's there. So, it is only possible to discover everything, unless you get the chance to 'measure' the universe from the outside. Which is impossible, because 'uni' in the 'universe' implies there's only one. Parallel words and yada yada are a part of the same UNIverse. There are no 'multiple universes', it sounds like 'sportsmenka' :-)
That was the "offtopic break" of today's show.
Let me introduce a new concept I thought of in the past, and today I gave it some more thought. I don't have a name for it yet, but it's something like "Anti future-shock" (similar to 'culture-shock', but this time the cause of the shock is the future). I am too prepared for the future, and I am permanently working on pushing the bound forward, "to infinity, and beyond!"?; i.e. become prepared for the distant future too.
One simple example - my income. No clue how much of it I have, I don't use it. All I need is "enough to get me to the uni and back, and a little bit extra, for emergencies".
Somehow I always have spare empty discs (if someone asks), somehow I always have this, that, etc. Is it a bad thing to be prepared? I don't get it... Is this what they refer to with their mega-metaphoric "if you prepare too long, you'll miss the party"?
Hmm, I have deviated a bit. The topic was relationships. Let me plug in the Anti future-shock concept into this context - I expect a relationship to be very stable and very pleasant and very <insert list of features>. Which is why I am preparing myself for this, by studying and improving myself, by working, by reading books, by analyzing movies, friends' problems, families of friends, families of foes, etc. All this makes me a better partner for someone. I can also state that the process of self-improvement is endless. When do I know that I am 'good enough' to start a relationship? Is it possible that my preparations for the future will actually lead to my missing the 'big party'?
You know, I'd be pretty pissed off if it turns out those fools were right. Of course, they weren't right because they were, but because it was a coincidence, it's just that their model is more suitable for an imperfect world, such as ours (not that they?ve come to this conclusion after analyzing the problem).
So, maybe the cause of the problem is the eternal search for perfection? When you can be anybody, it's pretty difficult to be somebody :-) There you go, another one I made up just now.
Vica — 2006-12-05 05:27
interesanta teorie a fericirii.
I have a bit of a different idea of what it means to be happy. Being happy means living in the present. Note: That does not necessarily mean “don’t worry about the future.” Living in the present should by default imply thinking about the future. Because if one lives in the present TODAY, and has bad consequences tomorrow, then living in the present TOMORROW will not be malinka anymore.
But that is just a side note. The point is living in the present, and not the past.
For example, I was watching a 4-year-old kid on the beach the other day. She was playing in the water and then she saw a big boat passing by. She got extremely excited and started to run towards the boat to take a closer look at it. The girl’s mother, however, stopped her, and did not allow her to go after the boat. The girl stopped laughing. The mother took the girl by her hand and took her out of the water. In less than 2 minutes, the girl started playing in the sand, playing with the shells, and laughing at her younger brother’s maladroitness. Just like that, in 2 minutes, the girl became happy again. She stopped thinking about the boat a long time ago.
That’s when I thought, that if we, the adults, would be like this little girl from time to time, we would be much happier. We should stop thinking about the boats that we could not follow a while ago, and start enjoying the colorful shells that are in front of us now.
the site looks really nice. great job on its improvements.
Vica — 2006-12-05 09:54
as far as the “future shock” goes… I think that everyone has that, very often. it is simply the fear of the unknown, or the fear of change -> i.e. “I gotta be prepared for whatever the future holds for me,” or “just in case, I need to know/do this and that in case anything happens tomorrow to disturb my homeostasis.”
about relationships… stable, pleasant relationships are great, as long as BOTH partners are “learning” as you do (improving yourself, analizing relationship issues, etc).
I guess the rocket science is finding that perfect partner, who not only is a perfect romantic-chemistry match, but who also has an intellectual hunger and a constant strive to improve him/herself.
gata pt azi :)
Alex — 2006-12-05 16:19
Am o mica solutie acolo la problema, “time passes by and i forget why did i put someone in the blacklist"… mi se intimpla si mie uneori, am inteles ca daca duci o agenda, sau doar iti notezi pe o foai sentimentele si gindurile in momentul in care pui persoana in blacklist, ajuta la memorizarea si conservarea starii pure de cugetare limpede…care cu timpul si cu vintul… se deterioreaza, imbatrineste, si uneori chiar dispare…
Cit despre partea “inadaptabilitatii intelectualului in razboi si pe pace..” tind sa fiu deacord, persoane mai putin constiente de sine, de trecut, de viitor - par sa fie “fericite".
Dar am o impresie ca undeva dupa stadia in care intelectualul se simte nefericit pt ca nu poate schimba lumea cum vrea, urmeaza o stadie in care intelectualul isi zice “why wouldn’t i just relax?” :) si incepe sa nui pese de copii flaminzi din Sudan sau de fata de alaturi care isi doreste stabilitate financiara si se gindeste sa-l paraseasca…
hau iz this aidia tu iu, dude?
tchuss!
Ion Todirel — 2006-12-06 05:13
You are a strange guy, but you know that.
Constantin — 2008-07-08 03:38
I realize this is a pretty old post, I just wanted to add a point to the whole “living in the present” idea. I’ve read/heard somewhere that human beings are the only brain-wielding contraptions of nature who can recall pain and cannot adapt to it. All other animals know how to adapt to pain. For example, if a dog gets a thorn stuck in his paw, it will feel pain for a while, as a physical sensation, and then learn how to limp and not acknowledge the sensation of pain anymore. On the other hand, a person with a thorn in their skin will suffer 10x more because of the recollection of the pain and less because of the physical sensation in itself. Also, they will never even for a second consider the possibility of continuing in their activities without somehow “getting rid of” the pain. (Sidebar: what is worse, the fear of the dentist before the operation or the pain of the operation itself?)
I think this is an acquired skill (bug? feature?), and that’s why it doesn’t manifest in young children. But the memory of past suffering is what keeps people from living in the present.
gr8dude — 2008-07-11 17:31
Interesting point, I think this is definitely a feature; the more experience you have, the more data points there are for extrapolation / analysis. Therefore one can make better predictions about the future.
Sure, dogs can get easier over a problem, but they’re not the ones who flew to the moon, or developed complex systems to make their lives easier.
I guess that in the case of a human the price of losing a limb or an important organ is quite high, so a lot of evolutionary effort was invested in preventing this from happening, at the expense of logical layer [over]load (in terms described here: On humans and software).
I think the trick is in preventing that load from becoming an overload. One of the next stories will be on the subject.
Also, I predict that the next evolutionary steps humans will go through will affect more things at the logical layer. Today - it is all about coping with the huge amounts of inbound data, as our appliances, clothes and tech take quite good care of the other important tasks (stay warm, eat on time, find shelter, etc).
ceziceu — 2010-06-29 20:32
I expect a relationship to be very stable and very pleasant and very (insert list of features). Which is why I am preparing myself for this.
nu crezi ca ai putea deveni astfel prea accesibil, prea previzibil si astfel plictisitor? Putem diferentia fericirea doar prin contrast, dar cum sa o facem daca totul va fi doar frumos asa cum intentionezi sa faci?
gr8dude — 2010-07-05 04:51
Olga, de ce sa devii mai plictisitor daca esti om mai bun? Nu vad care este legatura.
De asemenea nu vad legatura intre X si ‘accesibil’. Ai in vedere ‘vulnerabil’? (Daca da, oricum nu vad conexiunea).
Despre contrast - aici e un moment important. Esti sigura ca doar prin contrast?
Oare inseamna asta ca acei care se casatoresc cu prima persoana de care s-au indragostit - nu pot fi fericiti?
Sau pot fi, dar neavind cu ce sa compare, nu vor fi fericiti pentru ca vor cauta ce sa faca pentru ca sa poata sa compare?
ceziceu — 2010-07-05 18:11
Spoiler alert: asta e doar o alternativa negativa .
Motto: ” Cum ti-ai simti sa asculti in fiecare zi de la cineva o poezie (buna sau rea) pe care el nu uita sa ti-o reciteasca? “
—-
Nu devii plictisitor fiind om bun, ci prin faptul ca avand grija sa nu stresezi pe cineva prea mult, ajungi sa devii previzibil si plictisitor.
Devii accesibil in plan emotional. Ea intotdeauna va sti ca o iubesti si o vei crede, intotdeauna gata de a o asculta ajuta, etc, adica always there for her. ALWAYS. Adica Stabilitate. Adica neschimbare. Adica lipsa unor perturbatii emotionale. Adica niciun fluture in burtica. Adica nicio scanteie pentru creatie (care nu ar fi ea, fie si pentru crearea relatiei). Si daca fluturii conteaza pentru ea, ea va cauta o alta sursa a lor.
Eu stiu de contrast. Fara de rau, nu putem identifica bunul. Spune-mi alte modalitati.
Sa zicem constrastul in cazul casatoriei. Sa zicem ca m-am indragostit la 16 ani. Sansa sa fiu fericit/a in casatorie e mai mica decat daca m-as casatori la 26 pentru ca am mai multa experienta. Respectiv la 46 de ani as fi si mai fericit in casatorie pentru ca am asteptari mai mici fata de oameni si pot intelege/ierta mai multe. Am avut destul contraste in viata pentru a ce e bun si ce e rau, intelege ce vreau si sa nu mai caut aventuri sau “oare ce a fi daca…". M-as implica mai calitativ si cantitativ in relatie fiind poate la a treia indragostire sau chiar far de dragoste, dar plin de angajament emotional decat daca as fi la 16 ani.
Eu stiu ca poate tu esti omul care ar zice “Dar eu nu sunt asa!".
Nu e valabil pentru toti oamenii sa se plictiseasca de la bunatate si accesibilitate emotionala, dar avem cunoscuti comuni pentru care acest lucru este “on". Nici nu stii cu cine te legi.
Cum ai sti stii ca Ea e astfel? Nu poti sa ii stii toate gandurile! Cat de matur, bine-judecand nu ar parea, ea poate fi un om cu necesotati de tulburari emotionale. Si poate tu crezi ca i-ai creat toate conditiile, doar ea sa fie fericita. Poate nici ea nu stie ca conditiile date o poate plictisi? Poate in 2 sapt, paote in 3 luni, poate intr-un an, in timp ce tu deja completamente ai intrat in ea?
gr8dude — 2010-07-25 17:03
Nu stiu de ce trebuie sa devin plictisit daca totul in jurul meu merge bine si nu exista conflicte. O persoana este permanent incadrata in diverse activitati si incearca lucruri noi, experimenteaza.
Omul pleaca la universitate, la lucru, interactioneaza cu societatea. Te asigur ca vor aparea bug’uri la studii, la serviciu, si controller’ul din troleu din cind in cind te va scoate din sarite. Omul priveste filme, asculta muzica, calatoreste, merge la diferite concerte, se intilneste cu rudele.
Eu iti pot genera o lista lunga de factori care pot cauza “perturbatii emotionale".
De asemenea, trebuie sa spun ca “gazul ideal", “zero absolut", “punctul material” sau “sfera perfect sferica” lucreaza foarte bine in stiinta, dar cit de mult nu ai incerca - intr-o relatie vor fi elemente care nu sunt “perfect sferice” :-) Orice om bun din cind in cind calca pe bec.
Iata de ce nu-mi imaginez de ce iti vine in cap cuvintul-cheie “plictisit". Incearca sa gasesti inca un serviciu, daca esti plictisita ;-)
Contrastul nu este unicul mod de a intelege lumea. If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail ;-)
Vestea buna e ca avem foarte multe instrumente la indemina, si atunci cind pretul “cunoasterii prin contrast” este foarte inalt, putem sa folosim alte mecanisme (ex: extrapolare, interpolare, sa invatam din greselile altora, sa citim carti, etc).
Nu trebuie sa-mi tai o mina la un polizor ca sa-mi dau seama ca trebuie sa fiu atent in preajma acestei instalatii ;-)
Despre exemplul tau cu 16 si 26, apoi 46 ani, pot sa mai adaug - la 66 de ani vei fi si mai buna, iar la 86 vei deveni partenerul perfect, fix cum protagonista (-:
j.l. cine sunt acei cunoscuti comuni? :-)