pull down to refresh

Society doesn't deserve to expect the basket weaver to be a firefighter. How right is it, from society's point of view, to have miserable firefighters wishing they were basket weavers? How right is it for the firefighter to be miserable?
I don't disagree with this as much as you think, I don't think. I agree that miserable firefighters (or miserable anything) are a bad thing, and people shouldn't be miserable if they have an alternative. What I was getting at is that it might be better to be a lawyer (just to pick a random thing) if that inherently gave you a satisfaction level of 7, vs a basket-weaver, if that gave you a SL of 8.5, bc the other aspects of being a lawyer, and the social legitimacy that that job confers, probably outweighs in aggregate the benefits from basket-weaving.
Put another way, my usage of "right" was mostly pragmatic -- you're not independent of the world, so fixating on the purity of your love of basket-weaving is likely to be empirically a bad idea, if you're measuring something like aggregate life satisfaction.
If I had an advantage in answering this question, it was that no one, including society, had expectations of me. If society had a place to write, it would've written me off.
I would love to hear more about this, if you felt like relating it, but understand if you wouldn't. My recollection of your bio is that you went to a good college and did well, and then got a good job and also did well. Was this after a decadent youth where you felt written off?
I might've gotten lost, but "this" is "being the smartest one in the room"?
Yeah. My experience is that a lot of people (maybe also myself) get trapped into being a certain person. They are successful at being that person; they're good at it; perhaps they're well-rewarded for it. But it's somehow wrong. That's what I'm poking at here -- mastering a way of Being isn't that predictive of a happy person (objectively measured) or a good life (guessing). The "smartest person" example is an archetype that I actually know -- they have made a niche, been successful at it. But I think it's a trap.
"what is that" for you when you don't consider "is it right"?
There's a question.
this territory is moderated
1042 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 18 Apr
I don't disagree with this as much as you think, I don't think.
I went hard on that point, but I take issue with even raising the question "is it right." Because, as much as a person thinks they can meter its influence, it's a mental sea monkey for nearly anyone and especially people who have high expectations of themselves. The people I'm talking about, all smarter and more successful than me, exhibit excessive concern about "is it right" and "what is the outcome." For smart prosocial people they will leverage "what is that" to do right and achieve a significant outcome regardless of all the "what is that" measuring they think is oh so rational.
The crux of the point I have to make is this. The feeling of finding one's purpose is mostly a matter of you respecting your own emotional wishes. It is a self-gratitude for choosing the most emotionally aligned task. Over rationalizing and quantizing these decisions is like telling everything you are to go fuck itself. No amount of societal righteousness or status or approval can heal the tear you create in your self by doing this.
I would love to hear more about this, if you felt like relating it, but understand if you wouldn't.
It's all so complain-y. Childhood turmoil -> flunking out of high school -> bankless, carless, small town grocery clerk, suicideating misery -> reading a lot -> have epiphany that I can be more -> go back to school for anything -> (re)discover an interest in computers and pursue it without concern for anything but the sense that it's "what is that" -> follow "what is that" forever.
But I think it's a trap.
I'm certain it is.
reply
I must ponder. Thank you.
reply