[HN Gopher] Staring into the abyss as a core life skill
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Staring into the abyss as a core life skill
        
       Author : troydavis
       Score  : 188 points
       Date   : 2022-12-22 15:54 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.benkuhn.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.benkuhn.net)
        
       | Jeff_Brown wrote:
       | Journaling without any goal besides understanding myself better,
       | particularly my beliefs, had a similarly transformative effect on
       | me. I stopped feeling angry and entitled to things I didn't have,
       | and I became extremely positive in my social interactions and in
       | my head.
       | 
       | For a long time I credited knowledge graph technology for the
       | change, but now I think it was more likely just the practice of
       | committed, written introspection. (The graphs definitely helped
       | me navigate my notes faster and with less redundancy, though,
       | which mattered because there were a lot of them.)
        
       | samsquire wrote:
       | The world is filled with much good, but if you're looking at what
       | is false, not good or rejecting what is good you shall find it
       | hard to notice.
       | 
       | If you look for the good and aim toward it then you get more of
       | it.
       | 
       | If you aim to look for bad and search for it you shall get more
       | of it.
       | 
       | Everyone eventually reaps what they sow. And you can judge a tree
       | by its fruit.
       | 
       | Rather than focus on the badness of the bad situation or stare
       | into the abyss. Pick good responses that are independent of bad.
       | 
       | In other words, two wrongs don't mean right.
        
         | JadeNB wrote:
         | This post seems almost comically like a collection of self-help
         | slogans, and not far off from blaming people who are in a dark
         | place for getting themselves there. (I also don't understand
         | how "two wrongs don't mean right" connects to the rest of it.
         | Is the idea that one is doing wrong by thinking bad things of
         | wrong that has already been done?)
         | 
         | Also, if this is meant as a corrective to the article (as
         | suggested by "Rather than focus on the badness of the bad
         | situation or stare into the abyss. Pick good responses that are
         | independent of bad"), then it seems that it is a response to
         | the title, not the content. The very beginning of the article
         | emphasises that the point is not to dwell on the bad in order
         | to foster despair, but rather to acknowledge the existence of
         | the bad in order to be able to move from it towards a remedy.
         | If you can't even acknowledge that a bad situation exists, then
         | you can't make a good response to it.
        
           | samsquire wrote:
           | Thank you for your reply.
           | 
           | What I was trying to put across was that we get the results
           | what we cause. I always bear the outcome of what I did. Can
           | you think of an escape from the effects of what we do? (I
           | deliberately ignore the other side of this, I'm not talking
           | about effects we did not cause, such as trouble others cause
           | for others)
           | 
           | If you pick good, right, proper, meant to be, what should be,
           | what is righteous, what is true, honest, genuine, with
           | integrity actions, then you ought to bear fruit that is
           | caused by that. I think that this produces better outcomes
           | than picking bad, not good, wrong, untrue, false, not honest,
           | not genuine actions/thoughts/speech.
           | 
           | In hindsight we can determine what actions were not right,
           | since they didn't produce the right, good results.
           | 
           | So if we seek after good, shouldn't we get the effects of
           | good back because we surround ourselves with it?
           | 
           | This is separate independent reasoning from when bad things
           | befall people who do all things right. I haven't thought much
           | about that.
           | 
           | Do we bear the effects of what other's cause?
           | 
           | The two wrongs don't create a right refers to the idea of
           | avoid basing my reasoning on doing something on something bad
           | and calling it good. I should keep my reasoning of my
           | reaction to bad things purely based on goodness and not based
           | on the bad thing itself. I never want to say I did something
           | purely due to a bad thing. I think you could call it
           | motivation. I want to keep good and bad independent and not
           | merge them into one. Can something bad cause something good
           | in other words? Or did the good that it is a reaction to
           | cause itself?
        
             | layer8 wrote:
             | The article argues for not ignoring the parts of reality
             | you're uncomfortable with. Good or bad is neither here nor
             | there. The point is to not be constrained by having a
             | skewed view of reality or by avoidant behavior.
        
             | derivagral wrote:
             | >In hindsight we can determine what actions were not right,
             | since they didn't produce the right, good results.
             | 
             | Disagree, to the extent that you need to discount results
             | against available information, processing ability, and
             | alternatives at the time of the decision. Also, not all
             | good or bad decisions have similar outcomes, the world is
             | not just. Personally, I've found more use out of refining
             | my decision process and what goes into it than focusing on
             | results. Not to say results aren't a useful signal, but
             | they're hardly the only or even the most important signal.
             | 
             | I agree with you that the EV of trying to be "good"
             | generally outweighs the other path. However, not getting
             | discouraged by the marketing of "bad with no consequences"
             | is difficult in today's world!
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | syzarian wrote:
         | Bill Clinton and Donald Trump are notable examples of people
         | who have not reaped what they sowed.
        
         | Atreiden wrote:
         | "If you look for the light, you can often find it. But if you
         | look for the dark, that is all you will ever see."
         | 
         | - Iroh
        
         | eggsmediumrare wrote:
         | Quality of fruit is the product of soil and climactic
         | conditions, not the tree itself.
        
         | RajT88 wrote:
         | Nah. I know some real garbage people who seem to be immune to
         | Karma. No bad ever comes their way.
         | 
         | And some wonderful people who seem to attract all the Karma
         | which slid right off the garbage people.
         | 
         | The world is unfair, and the universe doesn't care. Morality is
         | emergent from consciousness; in a time before our big thinky
         | brains had evolved, there was no such thing as bad and good.
         | 
         | Evidence: How many, many animals live and thrive is deeply
         | immoral by human standards. With few exceptions, pick just
         | about any horror movie and I can show you an animal who
         | exhibits those behaviors in its normal life.
        
           | jondeval wrote:
           | > Evidence: How many, many animals live and thrive is deeply
           | immoral by human standards.
           | 
           | The fact that non-human animals live an existence of violent
           | survival does not seem to be prima facie evidence for the
           | nonexistence or incoherence of human morality.
           | 
           | Human beings are _rational_ animals. The term _rational_ here
           | is being used in a specific and technical sense. Non-human
           | animals are subject to the laws of nature in a manner that
           | acts more directly on their passions. Human beings are also
           | subject to the laws of nature, but the forces of nature are
           | mediated by our rationality.
           | 
           | Animal Act: (1) Offspring are hungry (2) brings food to
           | offspring
           | 
           | Human Act: (1) Offspring are hungry (2) Reflects and Decides
           | to provide food (3) brings food to offspring
           | 
           | An act is deemed immoral if it is a misuse of the rational
           | faculty for ends that are not in conformity with the laws of
           | nature.
           | 
           | Human Act (immoral): (1) Offspring are hungry (2) Reflects
           | and Decides not to provide food for selfish reasons (3)
           | offspring go hungry
           | 
           | Animals suffer but they are not moral agents like human
           | beings since there is no mediating rationality that can be
           | misused for ends that are not in conformity with nature's
           | laws. The phrase _Nature 's Laws_ is being used broadly to
           | include physical, biological or evolved social laws
           | intertwined with the essential characteristics of the
           | species.
        
             | RajT88 wrote:
             | > The fact that non-human animals live an existence of
             | violent survival does not seem to be prima facie evidence
             | for the nonexistence or incoherence of human morality.
             | 
             | You missed the point. Morality is a human invention, much
             | like computers are (albeit philosophical, not physical in
             | nature).
             | 
             | Like computers, it didn't exist before consciousness
             | evolved.
             | 
             | Talking about morality as a universal truth, and there
             | being some invisible scales of justice which will
             | eventually even out is thusly irrational.
        
               | jondeval wrote:
               | Apologies if I'm missing the main point. I certainly
               | agree that consciousness + rational choosing must be a
               | prerequisite for moral acts.
               | 
               | But I wouldn't concede that morality is a human invention
               | like the computer. That would imply that it's
               | _accidental_ and not grounded in anything fundamental to
               | our species or nature 's laws.
               | 
               | Do you believe that choosing to feed your kids, or
               | choosing to not kill someone are simply created
               | constructs like the computer or the airplane?
               | 
               | Also, I think these two statements can be true at the
               | same time: (1) The Moral Law is real and exists outside
               | of our subjective experience and historical cultural
               | evolution and (2) concepts like Karma are without
               | evidence.
        
               | RajT88 wrote:
               | > Do you believe that choosing to feed your kids, or
               | choosing to not kill someone are simply created
               | constructs like the computer or the airplane?
               | 
               | The actions exist obviously.
               | 
               | My point is that in the absence of consciousness there is
               | no positive or negative value ascribed to them.
               | 
               | Let's take the example of feeding your children, but use
               | the opposite extreme. What you see plenty of in nature is
               | a mother eating her children. Sometimes for no reason at
               | all (Octopus, Guppies, rodents).
               | 
               | Are there certain species that are fundamentally immoral?
               | Maybe so, from our perspective. But without our
               | perspective _no_ value is assigned. It is just another
               | thing animals do without any moral weight.
        
               | jondeval wrote:
               | I don't think the concept is morality is relevant in
               | those extreme cases. It looks like we are more or less
               | saying the same thing.
        
           | prox wrote:
           | While the universe might not care, people can. Will you?
           | 
           | In many situations you have the choice to help or to be the
           | one that choses selfishness. To bridge a divide or not.
        
             | RajT88 wrote:
             | I can, and do, and people should. You have missed the point
             | of my post if you're replying like this.
        
           | lazyeye wrote:
           | Yes the majority of animals die a violent death. If they
           | manage to survive long enough, they get too old to escape a
           | predator.
        
           | flashgordon wrote:
           | I agree with karma and deservedness not being aligned but I
           | am pretty sure an animal doing what it is doing is limited by
           | the need to hunt and feed rather than to subjugate and be
           | sadistic?
        
             | AlexandrB wrote:
             | Not for more intelligent animals. Consider the footage of
             | killer whales "playing with their food" from Blue Planet.
        
             | 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
             | Clearly you do not own cats.
        
               | gpderetta wrote:
               | Are you talking those cute furry four legged sadistic
               | serial killers?
        
               | flashgordon wrote:
               | Hot damn I don't. I always thought I'd be a cat person
               | but sounds like I need to revisit my choices!
        
             | nradov wrote:
             | I have seen California sea lions killing ocean sunfish
             | (mola molas) in a way that appears to be sadistic, or at
             | least just for sport. The sea lions bite the fishes' fins
             | off without eating them, then play with the crippled bodies
             | like living frisbees. After a while the sea lions get bored
             | and let the fish sink to the seafloor where they're eaten
             | alive by crabs.
             | 
             | Nature, red in tooth and claw.
        
               | maria2 wrote:
               | Is that a form of sadism? Perhaps the sea lion is unable
               | to conceive of the suffering of the fish. To the sea
               | lion, the fish is merely an object. Playing with the fish
               | is no different than playing with a rock to the sea lion.
        
               | layer8 wrote:
               | Sounds very similar to a psychopath incapable of empathy.
        
               | fluoridation wrote:
               | Lack of empathy is the norm in nature, not the exception.
               | A species of predator that could empathize with its prey
               | would starve to death.
        
               | dinosaurdynasty wrote:
               | Does that matter for the fish?
        
               | vlunkr wrote:
               | No, but that's not the question being discussed.
        
           | unity1001 wrote:
           | > With few exceptions, pick just about any horror movie and I
           | can show you an animal who exhibits those behaviors in its
           | normal life.
           | 
           | But in the end, the animals that thrive end up being the ones
           | that cooperate both within their species and with other
           | species. From humans to symbiotic bacteria and jellyfish...
        
           | paulpauper wrote:
           | Karma is just confirmation bias
        
             | anonporridge wrote:
             | Karma is a psyop perpetuated by people with power to keep
             | that masses passive, because they think the universe will
             | do the job of dealing out justice for them.
             | 
             | Ditto belief in a god that judges and punishes the wicked
             | in the afterlife.
        
       | rektide wrote:
       | I love this post. Support for seeing the harder toil of life
       | without necessarily being overcome is, in my view, one of the
       | things I've seen least well done least performed least
       | demonstrated for developing youth.
       | 
       | Semi related, been re-reading Ministry for the Future, and we
       | just had a blurb on the Availability Hueristic, the preference
       | for relying on what you know & is familiar.
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic
       | 
       | A main character is trying to face the larger world of issues, to
       | see other things, & not let avoidance take over. This empathy
       | for, willingness to tangle in more tham you know & more than
       | what's familiar often involves looking into the fear-spots, in
       | recognizing bigger scarrier parts of the world. It's a huge skill
       | that, for me, growing up & as an adult, has been such a reliable
       | mark of character & interestingness, was the boundary between a
       | maturing engaged useful person & a scary ineard facing existence
       | that lacks a empathy, a willingness to see beyond themself.
       | Seeing beyond yourself, overcoming the Availability Hueristic,
       | Seeing into the Abyss seem all related & high value, define a
       | higher order humanness that I wish to see spread & grow through
       | humanity, that we need to work on.
       | 
       | But which are vastly underdescribed, under emphasized, under-
       | spoken. Glad to have this post.
        
       | roughly wrote:
       | I was told once that by the time you're genuinely considering a
       | big change - by the time you're aware there's an abyss - the
       | answer is probably "do it." There are things that are normal
       | fears - "I have a serious medical condition and can't risk being
       | without health insurance," that kind of thing - but "abyss"
       | questions tend to be the sorts of things where you can't really
       | articulate what your concerns are, or they're more about status
       | or perception or just a general risk aversion ("what if I never
       | find a job again?" "do I really want to be a divorcee?" "will my
       | peers think I'm a failure?"), and the reason you're really even
       | considering it is because you're currently miserable. People tend
       | to stay at jobs longer than they should, in relationships longer
       | than they should, and in misery longer than they should.
        
       | curation wrote:
       | Subjectivity is an abyss. The Real is the tension between
       | symbolizer and symbolized as we try and fail to fill reality,
       | which is unfinished. Theories of Everything do not come from
       | science but from philosophy. Plato, Hegel, Lacan, McGowan, Dolar,
       | Zizek, Freud, Fanon.
        
       | Jeff_Brown wrote:
       | Do you know anyone who made the leap and regretted it? I'm not
       | thinking of any, but my memory isn't great. Also I think people
       | don't typically share their self-doubts, even ones that happened
       | years ago, very frankly.
        
         | yawnxyz wrote:
         | I made the leap into a weird industry (biotech) as a
         | designer/engineer, and though I don't "fully regret it" I still
         | see friends/peers build up a lot of wealth that's simply not
         | possible in this space.
         | 
         | Yes, life's been more meaningful; we've treated patients and
         | sent them home and that's a great feeling, but always with the
         | question, "at what personal cost?"
        
       | physicles wrote:
       | A bit over 10 years ago I was still an evangelical Christian. I
       | decided to ask myself, "What's the most logical way to live in
       | light of your religious beliefs? Why aren't you living that way?"
       | 
       | That line of questioning was scary, but also invigorating. Scary,
       | because it probably meant leaving behind a cushy tech job.
       | Invigorating, because I imagined I'd end up as a missionary
       | somewhere, which is a pretty amazing life if you really believe
       | that Christianity is true.
       | 
       | After 18 months of staring into the abyss, I wasn't a Christian
       | anymore. It was the hardest and most important thing I've ever
       | done.
       | 
       | Two things made the journey possible:
       | 
       | 1. I made it impossible to stop. I'd decided that I wanted to
       | live as consistently as possible with my beliefs, so I couldn't
       | stop until I knew what those beliefs were. The only possible
       | outcomes were a) missionary, or b) non-Christian.
       | 
       | 2. I found others who went through the same thing. A few were
       | friends, but most were authors or random people online who wrote
       | about their experience, like lukeprog on lesswrong.com.
        
         | prewett wrote:
         | > The only possible outcomes were a) missionary, or b) non-
         | Christian.
         | 
         | That seems like an unnecessarily tiny set of possibilities, and
         | pretty much guaranteed from the beginning you were going to
         | choose (b), since "non-Christian" allows a huge flexibility of
         | options, while "missionary" is one specific vocation and chosen
         | only by a small subset of Christians. It's sort of like a
         | person saying he will only stay an American if he's going to be
         | a federal judge otherwise he'll emigrate.
         | 
         | Now, Evangelical thought lends itself to the sort of conclusion
         | you came to: it really only values spiritual activities, so
         | there is not any value for daily life in and of itself. I've
         | heard pastors say "the reason why God doesn't take us to heaven
         | immediately when we're saved is so that we can bring others to
         | Christ" and "there is nothing for you in this world [because
         | the Bible says 'the world is evil']". Which I'm coming to
         | regard as functionally heretical, since there is no balance at
         | all, certainly no celebration that the world God made is good
         | and very good, and functionally limits you to careers of
         | evangelist or pastor.
         | 
         | The larger history of Christian thought is more robust, though.
         | Consider Paul: "make it your _ambition_ to lead a _quiet life_
         | : you should mind your own business and work with your hands"
         | (1 Thess 4:11, emphasis added) Or Tim Keller on work: your work
         | is your gift to the people around you; by extension, your work
         | is bringing God's gift to the people you interact with. ("Gift"
         | here not meaning you don't get paid; there was a great barbecue
         | place where I lived, and it was a gift to me to have fantastic
         | barbecue, but I can assure you that it was not cheap)
        
           | Apocryphon wrote:
           | It's like the Evangelicals forgot Luther's doctrine of
           | vocation.
           | 
           | https://credomag.com/article/martin-luther-and-the-
           | doctrine-...
        
           | physicles wrote:
           | For me, the truth of Christianity always rested on its
           | objective historical truth claims, especially the
           | resurrection. And for many years I believed these truth
           | claims had sufficient evidence going for them.
           | 
           | But then I was hoping to find evidence that would convince a
           | rational non-believer, so I looked closer. I found out that
           | Adam and Eve didn't exist, the flood didn't happen, the
           | exodus didn't happen, Daniel was written much later than it
           | claims to be, the slaughter of the innocents in Matthew
           | didn't happen, and the founding miracles of Christianity
           | aren't that different from other religions of that time and
           | place. I started giving the benefit of the doubt to skeptics
           | instead of Christian apologists. It became impossible to make
           | the leap that, despite all these issues, the bodily
           | resurrection of Jesus was nevertheless historical.
           | 
           | I never wanted to lose my faith, but once I saw that its
           | historical truth claims didn't hold up to scrutiny, it just
           | kind of crumbled.
           | 
           | I understand that others have a different standard of proof
           | for these miracles than I do. Plenty of people I've talked to
           | over the years have said that looking for evidence is
           | foolish, but I find that ridiculous: if Christianity doesn't
           | have enough of a foothold in reality that we can find
           | evidence for its unique claims, then why should we think it's
           | true? If I should "just have faith", why is it Christianity
           | that I should just have faith in?
           | 
           | I also understand that there are other ways of being
           | Christian that don't depend on any of the miracles in the
           | Bible being historical. But that never made any sense to me
           | either: if we're dismissing huge swaths of the Bible because
           | "we know better," how is what's left not just the religion
           | we've made up? What would be the point of that?
        
         | jondeval wrote:
         | What were the reasons that made you embrace that change?
         | Consistency is certainly admirable, but you can consistently
         | embrace incorrect world views.
        
           | physicles wrote:
           | As I wrote in a sibling comment, my faith always rested on
           | Christianity's historical truth claims. So once I reached the
           | conclusion that they weren't true, there was no way I could
           | continue to embrace Christianity. I had to rethink everything
           | from the ground up.
        
       | 2devnull wrote:
       | "And I knew I had to finally update. To actually change what I
       | planned to do, to change what I was doing now, to do something
       | different instead."
       | 
       | Reminds me of the famous Rilke poem:
       | 
       | "Otherwise this stone would seem defaced beneath the translucent
       | cascade of the shoulders and would not glisten like a wild
       | beast's fur:
       | 
       | would not, from all the borders of itself, burst like a star: for
       | here there is no place that does not see you. You must change
       | your life."
       | 
       | And pivot he did.
        
       | civopsec wrote:
       | Interesting! I wonder what kind of philosophy this author has and
       | their outlook on life is. How could it be good to stare into the
       | abyss? Won't it drive you mad? This must be an interesting read.
       | 
       | > I'm probably not using "stare into the abyss" in the exact same
       | sense Nietzche intended, since I wouldn't really describe what
       | I'm talking about as "fighting with a monster" or like it has the
       | potential to turn you into a monster. [...] as did Elon Musk when
       | he said that
       | 
       | > [...] Staring into the abyss means thinking reasonably about
       | things that are uncomfortable to contemplate, like arguments
       | against your religious beliefs, or in favor of breaking up with
       | your partner.
       | 
       | > [...] The first time I learned what really exceptional abyss-
       | staring looks like, it was by watching Drew, the CEO of Wave.
       | Starting a company requires a lot of staring into the abyss,
       | because it involves making lots of serious mistakes (building the
       | wrong thing, hiring the wrong person, etc.)
       | 
       |  _groans_
        
       | vlunkr wrote:
       | In general I agree with this, though it seems to be mostly about
       | startup founders pivoting.
       | 
       | I do take issue with this suggested exercise:
       | 
       | > What bad things are you afraid of happening? Imagine in detail
       | what it would be like if they happened.
       | 
       | I know people that do this regularly, I would consider it
       | indicative of an anxiety disorder, not a healthy behavior.
        
         | dnissley wrote:
         | I think it depends on your reaction to those imaginings. I do a
         | decent amount of "staring into the abyss." It's actually a way
         | for me to calm my anxiety. Because once I walk through the
         | worst case scenarios in detail, I can always say: I will make
         | it, I will be fine, I can be happy even in those situations. If
         | I don't explicitly walk through the scenarios in detail, I tend
         | to catastrophize them in a vague way -- "It'll be terrible",
         | "no good", "so unhappy". There's something about doing this
         | detailed walkthrough that requires me to state my previously
         | unstated assumptions that are often very wrong.
        
       | keeptrying wrote:
       | Salaries/Trustfunds are the main reason that people lose this
       | skill of staring into the abyss and or never gain it in the first
       | place.
       | 
       | You literally can't build this skill without taking your own
       | decisions and bearing the consequences of the same (without your
       | boss shielding you).
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | andrewfromx wrote:
       | "Nature loves courage. Throw yourself into the abyss and discover
       | it's actually a feather bed."
        
       | sharadov wrote:
       | Honestly I was not sure about tech when I made a choice to get an
       | electrical engg degree, a few years down the road I thought of an
       | MBA, but then went and co-founded a startup while holding a full
       | time job. I could afford it, was still in my early 30s and didn't
       | have kids. Although the startup did not succeed, that experience
       | taught me a lot( I called it my alternative to going to business
       | school). But overall, when I look back, tech was a great choice,
       | I always have had enough time for family and hobbies (my average
       | work week has always been 40 hrs). Maybe because I was fortunate
       | to pivot into Data when it was not a "sexy" field that it has
       | come to be.
       | 
       | Some paths are just "luck". But tech beats a lot of fields (
       | medicine, law) for the compensation against hours worked and
       | flexibility.
        
       | killjoywashere wrote:
       | Has anyone done a survey of founders, age of start, their number
       | of companies until success, age at success, their income, and
       | their familial net worth? Because it's a lot easier to "stare
       | into the abyss" when failure has survivable outcomes.
        
       | 082349872349872 wrote:
       | As bk mentions in his footnote, this googlebombs "staring into
       | the abyss".
       | 
       | "Courage to tackle the unpleasant" doesn't have the same ring,
       | however.
        
         | alan-crowe wrote:
         | To my ears "Courage to tackle the unpleasant" has the ring of
         | bounds known ahead of time. Chore X will be unpleasant. How
         | unpleasant? Between 4 Ughs and 7 Ughs. Maybe 8 Ughs.
         | 
         | So I know why I'm procrastinating, I don't want to tackle a 4
         | Ugh chore right now. But I can plan. Tomorrow morning I'll be
         | up for tackling a 10 Ugh chore, I can plan to do it then.
         | 
         | Sometimes we don't know the upper bound. The article mentions
         | religious doubts, which can escalate to nihilism and despair.
         | One cannot plan for that. No-one says: I'm too tired for
         | nihilism and despair this evening, I'll do it tomorrow morning.
         | 
         | Abyss? The examples in the article have a feel of a scarily
         | large upper bound, which we are putting off estimating. But we
         | could estimate it, realize that we are not at the abyss, we are
         | just facing a tough choice, and get on with it.
        
           | 082349872349872 wrote:
           | > _Gee, Schopenhauer. What are we going to do tonight?_
           | 
           | > _The same thing we do every night, Kierkegaard. Nihilism
           | and despair._
        
       | ssivark wrote:
       | "Staring into the abyss" is only half the challenge; the other
       | half is knowing what (values) you can hold on to while the abyss
       | stares back at you.
       | 
       | The latter is what stops people from looking too closely, or
       | asking hard questions -- because they fear that they might not
       | have a strong enough framework in which to answer them. And so
       | they look only as close as they can handle while they slowly work
       | up the strength and the courage.
       | 
       | Another kind of person happens to be very comfortable staring
       | into the abyss, interpreting with Procrustean simplifications,
       | and reacting to what they see -- without necessarily the strong
       | values in place to ground them; they are a loose canon,
       | especially if they are a high-agency person biased for action.
       | 
       | When the gentle equilibrium has been upset by an unexpected
       | outcome, the high-agency person has the fortitude to iterate the
       | cycle of staring into the abyss (still a loose cannon, if they're
       | not well grounded).
       | 
       | However, the median person might not -- and can end up doing an
       | incredible amount of collateral damage (to their own lives, and
       | the lives of people around them) if they do this with
       | insufficient skills or commitment. I wouldn't be surprised if a
       | fear of the abyss is an evolutionary/cultural survival mechanism
       | to protect them from themselves.
       | 
       | Very few people have the nous to carry out the whole iterated
       | process _well_.
        
       | TedShiller wrote:
       | > thinking reasonably about things that are uncomfortable to
       | contemplate, like arguments against your religious beliefs
       | 
       | Good exercise for democrats: acknowledge that the Hunter Biden
       | laptop was not fake, that negative news about the government are
       | being actively, illegally, and covertly suppressed by social
       | media companies.
       | 
       | It changes everything.
        
       | giantg2 wrote:
       | "Staring into the abyss means thinking reasonably about things
       | that are uncomfortable to contemplate, like arguments against
       | your religious beliefs, or in favor of breaking up with your
       | partner."
       | 
       | These might be difficult to discuss. But is there really anything
       | uncomfortable to contemplate?
        
         | crawfordcomeaux wrote:
         | Anything that consciously or subconsciously reminds someone's
         | mind or body of their trauma?
        
           | giantg2 wrote:
           | Hmm, if you count anger, I suppose so.
        
             | crawfordcomeaux wrote:
             | Anger is for sure a sign of something going unaddressed, as
             | humans can learn to enjoy and accept anything.
        
       | fedeb95 wrote:
       | I think you're missing what is perhaps the most well known quote
       | about this topic:
       | 
       | If you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares back at you.
        
         | fedeb95 wrote:
         | I know I missed the footnote; still, the quote meaning is sill
         | missing in the article meaning.
        
         | pavlov wrote:
         | It's in the footnote.
        
         | forbiddenlake wrote:
         | That is actually in article in the footnote.
        
           | shudza wrote:
           | A footnote is nice, but you can't really take a well known
           | phrase and just redefine it according to your needs, while
           | clickbaiting a bunch of people.
        
             | twelve40 wrote:
             | I don't think it was malicious, I think the author was
             | trying to be creative in a clumsy way.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | at_a_remove wrote:
       | Hunh. I think some people call this "testing their priors." In
       | _Pi_ (1998), there 's a lot of "... restate my assumptions: One
       | ..." as the narrator strives to correct his thought processes. I
       | recollect a short horror story in which a man becomes obsessed
       | with "doing away" with more and more of his life he deems truly
       | unneeded (it may have been named "To the Bone," it has been a few
       | decades). In the harder sciences, whatever is accepted as the
       | "the truth" is only a working model, hopefully to be replaced by
       | something better when experiments point toward some flaw.
       | 
       | It involves a lot of the ability to confront the Sunk Cost
       | Fallacy and a bit of whatever it is where you see people
       | unwilling to let go of something which inadvertently traps them.
       | 
       | I try to do this, frequently, as a kind of back-tracking when I
       | am stuck, or simply when I suspect it. However, I think it's
       | probably a bit dangerous to get into a habit of it, or to apply
       | it very broadly. The dead and the unborn need nothing, and one is
       | ever in a state of moving from the latter to the former, without
       | a way to take anything with you when the journey is done. Perhaps
       | an addendum to "nothing is true; all is permitted" might be
       | another semicolon and "everything is unnecessary."
        
       | Jeff_Brown wrote:
       | Sometimes. A lot of people have pretty well-defined values,
       | though, and stay in iffy situations out of uncertainty and loss
       | aversion. Even if the expected value of a radical uprooting and
       | redo is positive, the potencial downside -- alienation?
       | depression? loss of function? -- can be extreme.
        
       | crawfordcomeaux wrote:
       | Here's an abyss to stare into:
       | 
       | Humans generally don't have an idea of what their needs are.
       | 
       | Challenge: list all of your needs for surviving and thriving from
       | memory and also give a definition of each that's clear and not
       | simply some desire/want or societally created artificial
       | construct (computers and money are not needs).
       | 
       | Also, Maslow's hierarchy is too individualistic, so cheating with
       | it automatically loses. And another hint: excess and deprivation
       | of needs is a need in order to learn what the individual body's
       | needs for moderating each need is.
        
         | crawfordcomeaux wrote:
         | This is an important abyss to stare into because a sustainable
         | moneyless society that can effectively meet everyone's needs is
         | almost impossible to conceive of without being aware of all the
         | needs.
        
       | throwaway123989 wrote:
       | Ben Horowitz in THE HARD THING ABOUT HARD THINGS mentioned
       | similar thing:
       | 
       | How to lead even when you don't know where you are going: The
       | fine line between fear and courage
        
       | jamesgreenleaf wrote:
       | This sounds more like "playing devil's advocate" or taking a
       | contrarian view, or questioning one's assumptions or decisions.
       | Whatever you call it, the author is right about it being a useful
       | skill.
       | 
       | If you want to talk about "staring into the abyss" though... to
       | me that phrase evokes the casting of all reality into doubt. It
       | means to grapple with the Munchhausen trilemma, or to perceive
       | the limitless and arbitrary space of metaphysics, or to
       | acknowledge the oblivion of meaning that the shadow of death
       | casts over us. Either way, the abyss really is an abyss. I don't
       | know whether it's useful to stare into it.
        
         | dav_Oz wrote:
         | I second this as a classic example of _advocatus diaboli_ [0]
         | in order to find a hole/weakness/wrongness in one own's initial
         | argument/assumptions.
         | 
         | Taking the Nietzsche quote[1] into the context of his work: "
         | _Jenseits von Gut und Bose_ (Viertes Hauptstuck; Spruche und
         | Zwischenspiele, 146) " [ _Beyond Good and Evil_ ; Fourth main
         | part; Proverbs and interludes; 146]] your interpretation seems
         | more in line with the book.
         | 
         | The inevitability of birthing/becoming a Monster oneself by
         | fighting a Monster for too long is akin to staring into the
         | abyss long enough until the abyss is staring into you. Melting
         | away of cause and effect, the blurring, the reversing and
         | finally the interchangeability/permeability - in this case - of
         | the line between the object and observer (objectivism).
         | 
         | Nihilism (dissolution of all values, meaningless-ism) as a
         | standpoint devours its subject who in the beginning is looking
         | at the outside world all around - from the inside out in the
         | end.
         | 
         | [0]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil%27s_advocate
         | 
         | [1]http://www.zeno.org/Philosophie/M/Nietzsche,+Friedrich/Jense
         | ...
         | 
         |  _146 Wer mit Ungeheuern kampft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht
         | dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. Und wenn du lange in einen Abgrund
         | blickst, blickt der Abgrund auch in dich hinein._
        
         | Rimintil wrote:
         | > casting of all reality into doubt
         | 
         | Throwing one's reality into 'doubt' can cause you to
         | significantly change your behavior, thoughts, ideas, etc. If
         | those are largely negative to begin with and 'casting reality
         | into doubt' (which is certainly one piece, if not the major
         | piece of disassociation) in a safe place can improve and change
         | your behavior for the better, it seems like a great idea to me.
         | 
         | https://psyche.co/ideas/when-reality-slips-through-your-fing...
        
         | kdmccormick wrote:
         | I take what the author describes as "staring into the abyss" as
         | a special case of playing devil's advocate: one where the
         | contrarian view has significant and emotionally difficult
         | consequences, and you're actually letting yourself feel the
         | emotional weight of potentially choosing it instead of just
         | playing with the idea.
         | 
         | For example: Imagine you go to an engineering college, and you
         | start feeling like you might not like the idea of an
         | engineering career. You could play devil's advocate by chatting
         | with your engineering-enthralled friends about how fun it'd be
         | to drop out of college and go to culinary school instead, but
         | that's just talk. Staring into the abyss would be actually
         | thinking through the financial, social, and personal
         | implications of that choice, looking into culinary schools, and
         | letting that dread and anxiety and excitement wash over you
         | while you genuinely contemplate making the switch.
         | 
         | > If you want to talk about "staring into the abyss" though...
         | to me that phrase evokes the casting of all reality into doubt.
         | 
         | In a more literal sense, yeah, I agree, that's what staring
         | into the abyss is. I think here the author uses it as an
         | effective way of saying "question the assumptions of _your
         | immediate_ reality ".
        
           | bee_rider wrote:
           | It must be an indictment of _something_ that "introspection,
           | long term planning, thorough consideration of the idea of
           | changing career paths away from STEM" can be with a straight
           | face described as "staring into the abyss."
        
             | Swizec wrote:
             | I mentor an engineer for whom staring into the abyss
             | involved walking away from a decade long culinary career
             | and learning to code.
             | 
             | Changing your life is hard. It challenges your whole
             | identity. What you're switching from and too is irrelevant.
        
           | noduerme wrote:
           | > letting that dread and anxiety and excitement wash over you
           | while you genuinely contemplate making the switch.
           | 
           | But life also happens anyways. For me, a lot of what
           | constitutes "staring into the abyss" is accepting that
           | neither the original plan nor my alternate wish worked out as
           | expected - despite the best laid plans - because almost
           | nothing ever does. It's not just considering all the
           | implications of a decision but accepting that things just
           | work out differently than you hoped.
           | 
           | [edit] I guess I mean that accepting the _inevitability_ of
           | previous disappointments is as much or more a part of
           | grappling with the abyss as is considering the future.
        
             | lazide wrote:
             | Many folks refuse to accept or do either of these things.
             | If you aren't that person, then congrats! Well, maybe. It
             | has pros and cons either way.
        
               | riversflow wrote:
               | I can honestly say I'm pretty good at this and feel like
               | its more of a burden to me in my life so far. I no longer
               | know anyone who shares this trait, and most people find
               | even hearing me talk about it uncomfortable.
               | 
               | Perhaps I will get the opportunity to use it someday, but
               | as of now it is really just emotionally taxing to have
               | many uncomfortable thoughts that I have to bottle up.
        
         | baby wrote:
         | I would have been interested in reading such a blogpost yeah, I
         | feel like I got catfished :)
        
       | leashless wrote:
       | Staring into the abyss of your own death is a core spiritual
       | practice in many of the worlds spiritual traditions.
       | 
       | It's the important part of meditation.
        
       | stared wrote:
       | I like the idea of contemplating uncomfortable ideas, but I hate
       | the phrasing.
       | 
       | The abyss is void, nothingness. It is not a challenge; it is not
       | something to be studied or resolved. It has no structure and
       | offers no insight. "Staring in the abyss" is a suitable phrase
       | for existential dread, cosmic despair, and metaphysical visions
       | of hell. So, it is a good phrase for the worst of the worst parts
       | of depression rather than good advice.
        
         | w0hnen wrote:
         | interesting that you describe void as nothingness and then
         | immediately assign a negative value to it.
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9A%C5%ABnyat%C4%81
        
           | stared wrote:
           | The name can mean a few different concepts.
           | 
           | The concept I described is purely negative. If you ever
           | experienced even a glimpse of it, I doubt you would classify
           | it otherwise. For some references, I recommend classification
           | of mystical vision (psychedelic-assisted or not).
        
         | Jeff_Brown wrote:
         | I thought it was a well-established figure of speech meaning to
         | consider something terrifying. But I admit that I'm not finding
         | that definition quickly online.
        
       | iskander wrote:
       | This feels like a very superficial and somewhat silly
       | redefinition of "staring into the abyss".
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | hkon wrote:
       | Wow, the abyss was a lot shallower than I had imagined.
        
       | paulpauper wrote:
       | _Many of these students ultimately end up going into finance or
       | consulting, not because they were particularly excited about that
       | as a career path but because it's the easiest high-status next
       | step from their in-retrospect-poorly-chosen major. Unfortunately,
       | those are also career paths that require long hours and where the
       | work is often meaningless. While I'm sure that finance and
       | consulting are the right career choice for some elite college
       | graduates, I'd be surprised if it was the best choice for nearly
       | 50% of them._
       | 
       | But the pay is so much more too. This means you can retire sooner
       | and then use the free time to find meaning. It also means you
       | have more money to fund your hobbies and interests, and also just
       | having a nice standard of living is good too, and not having to
       | worry so much about unpaid bills, medical costs, etc. . People
       | who have crappy jobs also work long hours too and find the work
       | meaningless.
        
         | quartesixte wrote:
         | By the way, I find it confusing that the article states that
         | finance and consulting is the result of poorly chosen majors.
         | That's the kind of thinking you apply to kids who picked Jazz
         | Theory and then realized that La La Land is nearly pure
         | Hollywood fantasy (the ending anyways).
         | 
         | Those business/biz-econ/business admin/econ classrooms are
         | filled with kids who have no delusion about what they're
         | getting themselves into it. They're in it for the money and a
         | shot at being hired by the big shot names on Wall Street.
         | They're either passionate about the money, or they just want a
         | stable life with money.
         | 
         | And the entire undergrad experience of those two fields of
         | study do a pretty swell job of weeding kids out. Business
         | Frats, Clubs, Societies -- the emphasis on networking and
         | internships. Like, the classroom experience might be less
         | rigorous compared to your average pre-med student but make no
         | mistake getting a job on Wall Street requires a lot of work.
         | Just a very different kind of work.
         | 
         | It is also the only high status step outside of medicine and
         | law. Or claiming fame via Hollywood (in which nepotism runs
         | rampant) or Athletics (in which your ability to gain status is
         | almost entirely decided by whether or not you were born a
         | genetic outlier). The first two require a lot more schooling
         | and particular academic talent. The last two are basically
         | moonshots and the road to fame littered with failed attempts.
         | 
         | So finance it is.
        
         | hammock wrote:
         | Are finance and consulting really high status beyond the pay?
         | Why? In theory it seems like they might be, but most of my
         | peers in these fields are pretty uninspiring
        
           | patja wrote:
           | They are extremely high status among friends and family who
           | do not work in tech or IT, or among recent graduate peers who
           | are struggling to get a white collar career going and stuck
           | in service jobs or other jobs that will never break 100k/yr.
           | For a lot of those folks, just hearing about the types of
           | lunch and travel expenses enjoyed by consultants can imbue
           | the job with high status.
        
             | [deleted]
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | hammock wrote:
             | Which gets at the uninspiring bit. Having experienced fancy
             | lunches and travel, it ain't all it's made out to be and I
             | doubt that anyone higher status than me whom I would
             | actually aspire to, would give two hoots about it the way
             | the people you describe do
        
           | BlargMcLarg wrote:
           | Can't speak for the US but here, "suit" jobs are generally
           | held to higher regard even if the job no longer requires a
           | suit. Fancy names and a history of good pay definitely help.
           | 
           | If anything, IT is the outlier in "well-paid office jobs
           | which garner lots of respect".
        
             | robocat wrote:
             | > IT is the outlier in "well-paid office jobs which garner
             | lots of respect"
             | 
             | That is a relatively modern thing - I thought IT was
             | relatively unrespected even 20 years ago, although I am not
             | in the US, so maybe different there. I suspect the change
             | was occurring about when Zuckerberg became wealthy, maybe
             | late 00's?
             | 
             | It is fucking bizarre to me seeing "geek" go mainstream
             | (although commercialised geek is definitely different from
             | traditional geek - maybe even incompatibly so?).
        
             | switchbak wrote:
             | Suit jobs are only highly regarded amongst a subset of the
             | population. I think the more you understand the realities
             | of those jobs, the less appeal they have. There's also
             | certain personality types drawn to those roles which isn't
             | attractive for everyone.
             | 
             | I used to look at engineers and think I missed out by not
             | going down that road. Fast forward a few years and it turns
             | out most engineers I talk to see the tech industry as being
             | a much better draw (higher salaries, more jobs, etc).
        
           | giantg2 wrote:
           | I work for a financial company. The closer you get to the
           | money, the more status you're expected to _display_. They
           | expect you to have a BMW, Tesla, or similar. They expect you
           | to hire a guy to perform any manual labor. They expect that
           | you have a nice house in a nice area.
           | 
           | If you don't have these things, you're looked down on and
           | people assume you aren't successful/skilled. Just projecting
           | the image is enough to push some people into a promotion.
        
             | robocat wrote:
             | What are the options to avoid the status treadmill?
             | 
             | Faking displays seems hard (status markers are chosen for
             | their difficulty to fake, presumably the easy faking is
             | done by everyone, and I guess high cost if busted and
             | competition to catch others out?)
             | 
             | Can you be so competent that you can ignore the status
             | rules? Presumably difficult, because competence is hard to
             | measure, and competitively it is hard to achieve a
             | significantly higher level of competence than others? A
             | status player can have mistakes forgiven, but betting on
             | competence requires you never make a misstep?
             | 
             | Or do you just optimise for a level of acceptable status,
             | and maximise savings?
             | 
             | What happens to those that bug out?
        
             | JauntTrooper wrote:
             | I think the 'need to impress people' is often used as an
             | excuse to splurge. Maybe it's more expected for salesmen
             | like financial advisors, or small business attorneys that
             | are dealing with retail clients.
             | 
             | I'm a fairly senior investment banker (Managing Director,
             | group head), and I drive a 14 year old Honda. None of my
             | co-workers or clients have ever seen my car or been to my
             | house. I don't wear a watch.
             | 
             | Some of my co-workers will wear bespoke clothes and flashy
             | jewelry, but it's not required, and mid-tier conservative
             | suits and shoes are fine.
        
           | quartesixte wrote:
           | We live in a world where high pay = status. Not ideal if you
           | aspire the world to be more Meaningful or Spiritual or what
           | have you, but this is reality.
           | 
           | And when in the United States alone the average salary hovers
           | around $75K/yr, a 24 year old being able to command a near
           | $150K base-salary (excluding bonuses) is in the eyes of many
           | absolutely flying high.
           | 
           | Add to that Finance/Consulting/Professional Services
           | eats/live/travels/dresses in a manner that is high status in
           | our society and the jobs quickly becomes a status symbol and
           | attracts those who are willing to sacrifice some amount of
           | passion for status or material wealth.
           | 
           | It also is a field where it confers that wealth and status
           | without Having to Know Someone or Be A Genetic Outlier In
           | Physical Performance/Appearance.
           | 
           | Lastly, survive long enough and climb the ladder high enough
           | and you start gaining Power. That wealth no longer buys you
           | things but rather connections, access, and influence. Finance
           | sits in close proximity to many powerful people in the world,
           | and thus by proxy also gains status.
           | 
           | SWE/IT offers similar levels of wealth but unfortunately
           | lacks that proximity to power (yet) and as a class of
           | professionals seems to espouse cultural values that go
           | against the ostentatious displays of wealth that the average
           | person associates with high status. At the very least, no one
           | is showing up to morning standups in a custom tailored suit.
           | 
           | Source: my social circle growing up mostly consisted of
           | working class immigrant families. Getting into a T20
           | University and breaking into Wall Street was the very
           | definition of Making It.
        
             | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
             | Some people in finance and consulting think we live in a
             | world where money=status or to be honest the students
             | aspiring to career in finance and consulting tend to think
             | that - people in the trench get pretty jaded. Thankfully
             | this is a microcosm and there is a world beyond that.
        
             | hammock wrote:
             | You are onto something with the proximity to power thing. A
             | lot of understanding of the world unlocked for me once I
             | started peeling apart wealth & power, how wealth /= power,
             | and how power is the more important end (vs wealth). For
             | example, if anything, someone with a lot of wealth has
             | likely been selling away a lot of power in order to acquire
             | the wealth.
             | 
             | >It also is a field where it confers that wealth and status
             | without Having to Know Someone
             | 
             | I wouldn't have thought this. What in your view are those
             | fields?
        
               | quartesixte wrote:
               | Hollywood is a prime example of this. Music industry is
               | another. Book publishing is also rife with nepotism but
               | in a non-familial way. Anything media related in general.
               | Even journalism -- Anderson Cooper is a Vanderbilt. Chris
               | Cuomo's father and brother both high ranking politicians.
        
               | quartesixte wrote:
               | >For example, if anything, someone with a lot of wealth
               | has likely been selling away a lot of power in order to
               | acquire the wealth.
               | 
               | O, to the contrary, my dear friend. Someone with a lot of
               | wealth has gained by exploiting their wealth to gain more
               | power -- which results in them gaining more wealth.
               | 
               | I would say that the correct equation is Riches!=Power.
               | One can have a vast treasury that, incorrectly deployed,
               | does not gain them power.
        
         | patja wrote:
         | Consulting is also great on the job training in how the real
         | world of commerce and business operate, with the bonus that
         | after a year or two you probably have personal knowledge of how
         | a handful of major corporations operate, including which
         | corporate cultures are healthy/positive and which are not. The
         | types of lessons you never learn in a classroom.
        
           | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
           | The gap between what consulting companies like students to
           | think they will learn and what they actually learn is very
           | significant.
        
             | runlaszlorun wrote:
             | Ha, that's true. But at least you get to see how
             | dysfunctional nearly any corporation is pretty quickly.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | voisin wrote:
         | > It also means you have more money to fund your hobbies and
         | interests
         | 
         | Except investment banking and consulting both have notoriously
         | long (100+ hr/wk) work weeks leaving very little time for other
         | interests and hobbies. These careers effectively force you to
         | adopt the career as the core of your personality.
        
           | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
           | Consulting covers a lot of different companies with different
           | requirements. You very much can find one where you work a
           | large but acceptable number of hours outside of the
           | occasional crunch (50-ish is easy to find).
           | 
           | Also no one does 100+h/wk. That's not even physically
           | possible. Even juniors in IB which is notorious for being
           | gruelling are actually not doing much during the day. The
           | main issue is that work really starts when your partner
           | finishes their day of meetings and things have to be ready
           | for the next morning.
        
             | voisin wrote:
             | I agree that no one is working 100+ hr/wk but you still
             | have to be in the office that long. I.e. you don't have
             | time away from the office to partake in hobbies and other
             | interests.
             | 
             | Any management consultant (McKinsey, Bain, BCG, etc) not
             | travelling at least 4 full days and in the office 2 of the
             | other 3 isn't making enough money to be relevant to this
             | conversation. Again, it is time being sucked away from
             | other aspects of your life, regardless of whether you're
             | working or not.
        
               | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
               | > Any management consultant (McKinsey, Bain, BCG, etc)
               | not travelling at least 4 full days and in the office 2
               | of the other 3 isn't making enough money to be relevant
               | to this conversation.
               | 
               | That's ridiculous.
               | 
               | There is a world outside of the top 3 strategy consulting
               | companies where people do make good money. What you just
               | did is akin to limiting IT to Google, Apple and Meta.
               | 
               | Plus even there, assignments don't always have you
               | travelling for days especially if you work from a capital
               | as your clients are likely to be there too. You don't
               | work 6 days a week every week and the hours get a lot
               | more reasonable as you climb the ladder.
               | 
               | And I say that while not even thinking it's a good job. I
               | have been in and out of consulting (yes you can go back)
               | during the past decade and think this stint will be my
               | last. When it's nice, it can be very nice but when it
               | sucks, it sucks a lot. Also at some point you actually
               | forget if you really do interesting things or just get
               | really good at selling what you do.
        
           | bedhead wrote:
           | True but it still might be better than the alternative of
           | working just enough (~40 hours/week) to still make it hard to
           | spend a lot of time on outside interests while not living
           | very comfortably, financially speaking.
        
           | HEmanZ wrote:
           | My 2-cents seeing friends and a sibling go through the IB
           | track.
           | 
           | You have 100+ hr/wk for a few years in your 20s, when you're
           | young and can sort of handle it. But by the time you're
           | having a family you work more normal hours and make absolute
           | FU money (e.g my younger brother makes over 10x/yr what I do
           | at only 31 years old). It's not about the salary and hours
           | when you start at 22, its about the salary and hours when
           | you're 32 and 42.
           | 
           | I compare this to my friends who became physicians or
           | accountants, and I think the IB folks have a waaaay better
           | work-to-pay ratio long-term. I'm on the fence about
           | consulting because the pay ceiling seems lower and I don't
           | personally know enough of them.
        
             | lotsofpulp wrote:
             | You have much more flexibility of where to live as a
             | physician. Remote software developer is probably the best
             | pay to quality of life at work ratio, and probably even
             | higher pay outright if you were at a high flying tech
             | company for some portion of the last 15 years.
        
               | galdosdi wrote:
               | > You have much more flexibility of where to live as a
               | physician.
               | 
               | Ludicrously false. In the long run, sure. But your youth
               | will be spent in whatever random town the residency match
               | takes you to, and that's after having to go wherever
               | there's a med school that'll take you. The flexibility
               | comes much later and by then you may have settled down
               | accidentally somewhere you randomly got placed.
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | Also true that one has to give up their 20s and possibly
               | low 30s somewhere they do not want to be, but in general,
               | a doctor can pick up and go anytime after that compared
               | to someone in finance who generally has to stick around
               | the finance hubs.
        
         | zitterbewegung wrote:
         | I've tried doing my passion by doing two startups and also
         | going into finance and since hindsight is 20/20 a good reason
         | why I think I should have actually went into finance first and
         | or even going into consulting as a technical person in a large
         | Fortune 500 is that budgeting of projects and planning of
         | software to meet budgets is much clearer to me now and
         | management of time to find a solution would have informed me
         | much better than doing the startups first.
         | 
         | Also I could have started saving money for another startup
         | instead of incurring credit card debt.
        
         | theGnuMe wrote:
         | It's the journey, not the destination.
        
           | kneebonian wrote:
           | Life before Death
           | 
           | Strength before Weakness
           | 
           | Journey before Destination
        
         | greggman3 wrote:
         | The typical response is being in these jobs changes you so that
         | when you have the money you no longer have any meaning. You
         | have a passion, you put it on hold for 10-20yrs for $$$, you
         | come out the other end having lost your passion
         | 
         | Further, that assumes you make it out the other end. Almost no
         | one saves the money and retires early. Instead they get some
         | money, they get a nicer apartment, nicer car, start eating out
         | at fancier restaurants, shopping at higher end places, buying
         | fashion brands etc...
        
           | giantg2 wrote:
           | "you put it on hold for 10-20yrs for $$$, you come out the
           | other end having lost your passion"
           | 
           | People change for a lot of reasons. I gave up some hobbies
           | when I had a kid and I'm pretty sure I won't pick them back
           | up when I retire. People's passions change, or they realize
           | certain things are unobtainable. That's just life.
        
             | ip26 wrote:
             | It's become clear some hobbies are essentially status-
             | seeking among young adults and/or showing off to potential
             | partners. They simply don't make much sense anymore for
             | someone married with kids.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | > And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will
           | gaze back into you.
        
           | Xeoncross wrote:
           | +1 The project outline vs the actual shipped product
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | wwweston wrote:
           | This is a fair illustration of some failure modes for that
           | choice.
           | 
           | I took the other road: during my 20s and early 30s I spent a
           | lot of time chasing meaning while minimizing expenses and the
           | time I put into jobs and other explicitly career-focused
           | choices (although tech-related stuff turned out to be one of
           | my forms of play & exploration, and I did do the startup
           | thing a time or two). Can't say I outright _regret_ this
           | because I do think I exercised a lot of important personal
           | capacities and gained some insights, but at one point I did
           | look around and realize my place in society was effectively
           | "economically marginalized software developer" and that was a
           | weird and probably not optimal tradeoff from both a practical
           | or meaningful standpoint, especially considering I had still
           | had a lot of open questions and anxieties about meaning.
           | 
           | So, this path has potential failure modes too.
           | 
           | At that point I made a pretty deliberate choice to more or
           | less "sell out." Years later the upsides appear to have
           | outweighed the down, and I find myself with the suspicion
           | that meaning is found/made wherever you meet life
           | thoughtfully and intentionally, and that if I'd chosen
           | finance in my 20s (or more comp-rewarding tech roles) I'd
           | have had opportunities that were _different_ but not without
           | their own affordances for meaning (and probably a higher net
           | worth).
           | 
           | Still, I like my work and hobbies, and I never feel there's a
           | shortage of interesting and engaging things to pay attention
           | to in the world. I could continue like this for decades if
           | I'm lucky enough to; my most substantial worries are staving
           | off/prepping for whatever decline in health we all eventually
           | face, and with it capacity to engage the world robustly.
           | Perhaps I didn't do so badly after all.
        
             | alar44 wrote:
             | I did the exact same thing. Chased my passion through 30,
             | burnt out, sold out, and am now burnt out on the other side
             | 10 years later. Might sell all my shit and become a
             | carpenter or a framer.
        
               | lazide wrote:
               | Be aware, burn out is often as much or more about self
               | regulation than it is any specific activity. Being able
               | and willing to say no to mind one's boundaries being a
               | key skill.
               | 
               | Changing careers can help (the novelty provides rewards),
               | but rarely does whatever underlying thing causing the
               | issue disappear.
        
               | alar44 wrote:
               | I've been thinking about that. The IT industry doesn't
               | lend itself to boundaries very well so I think I'd like a
               | career where work stays at work.
        
               | Icathian wrote:
               | I suspect that no job lends itself to boundaries well,
               | and that a healthy willingness to enforce them is going
               | to be necessary regardless.
        
             | tdrgabi wrote:
             | Your comment made me think and see the usual "high paid,
             | sell out" - "low paid, high meaning" dichotomy in a
             | different light. I'll ponder it a bit more.
             | 
             | Thank you and Merry Xmas.
        
               | TedDoesntTalk wrote:
               | Not everything has to have meaning. In fact, nothing has
               | to have meaning for life to be worth living. It is a
               | delusion we tell ourselves that something must have
               | meaning to be worthwhile.
               | 
               | Having said that, I find value in relationships, not jobs
               | or hobbies or things. Meaning? There is no meaning.
               | Things are as they are. And it's beautiful.
        
               | lazide wrote:
               | Merely being good at what one does, when that is useful
               | to others, is often a good definition for meaning.
        
               | TedDoesntTalk wrote:
               | I would define that as "helpful" or "useful to society",
               | not meaningful.
        
               | Godel_unicode wrote:
               | You don't feel being useful to society had meaning? I
               | think you might be putting meaning on quite a pedestal.
        
               | TedDoesntTalk wrote:
               | You can assign meaning to anything. You can assign
               | meaning to a bird passing over your head as you propose
               | to your girlfriend: "it was meant to be."
               | 
               | So sure, there can be meaning in being useful to society.
               | But that's not really my point. My point is that meaning
               | does not need to be a goal. If you hang your life's worth
               | on the meaning you find, I am betting you're going to be
               | disappointed a lot of the time. It doesn't need to be
               | that way. Look beyond meaning for worth and value.
        
               | lazide wrote:
               | Is not being useful to others worthwhile and valuable?
        
               | TedDoesntTalk wrote:
               | Indeed, it is!
        
               | shanebellone wrote:
               | "Look beyond meaning for worth and value."
               | 
               | Well said.
        
               | coldtea wrote:
               | Well, "worthwhile" is not a natural state to crave
               | (animals in nature just are, they're not concerned with
               | "worthwhile" or "joy in little pleasures" and so on).
               | 
               | So, if you still want life to be "worthwhile", you might
               | as well ask it to be meaningful, it's pretty much the
               | same thing. Meaningless is just another way of saying
               | "not worth it".
        
         | saiya-jin wrote:
         | That's all nice theory on paper, but you sure have no clue
         | about reality of most folks you write about...
         | 
         | Life is too short, and damn too short to make huge mistakes
         | like this, for something so meaningless as just money. I am not
         | saying cash is completely meaningless, we don't live in utopia,
         | but the more you have them less meaning/significance they have.
         | 
         | Any white collar folk who ain't completely useless can earn
         | enough to have a decent life and realize (as quickly as
         | possible) that true meaning in life, and long term happiness
         | are in completely different direction than piles of cash. At
         | one point you start paying heavily with former to get latter.
        
           | twelve40 wrote:
           | this is stated rather categorically for a subjective opinion
        
         | adamsmith143 wrote:
         | >But the pay is so much more too. This means you can retire
         | sooner and then use the free time to find meaning.
         | 
         | The type of person that goes into Finance/Consulting is
         | certainly not the type of person that will want to retire
         | early.
        
         | UnpossibleJim wrote:
         | Those are good reasons, I'm not going to deny that but there's
         | something to be said for enjoying life while you're young
         | enough to take full advantage of it. Being poor(ish) when
         | you're young isn't the worst thing in the world, when you have
         | no real responsibilities. Grinding to make money in your
         | thirties and beyond, when those real responsibilities hit
         | always made more sense to me... but I may have done all of it
         | wrong. I don't know.
        
           | aiwv wrote:
           | > Grinding to make money in your thirties and beyond
           | 
           | I sort of think grinding is generally wrong at any age. If
           | you feel like you're grinding, perhaps it's time to take
           | stock and consider what you could be doing differently so
           | that you don't have to keep grinding to both meet your
           | responsibilities and enjoy life. Of course some might find
           | themselves with enough exigencies they have almost no choice
           | but to grind, but I doubt too many people on HN are really in
           | that boat.
        
             | hgomersall wrote:
             | Right, if you're not doing it for the journey, maybe you
             | need to find another destination or a better route or
             | something.
        
           | swagasaurus-rex wrote:
           | Maybe there's no right answer and everybody meanders through
           | life goals at their own pace, or not at all.
           | 
           | The requirement to make enough money to survive is
           | unignorable. Anything beyond that is just making up
           | goalposts. There's always another goalpost you could strive
           | to reach.
        
         | cung wrote:
         | I keep hearing that consulting and finance are terrible
         | uninspiring careers, but as a consultant I honestly have no
         | idea what else I could do that would be more inspiring. I would
         | love to know though.
        
           | perfecthjrjth wrote:
           | There are no other better choices available, unless one is
           | born into wealth. That's why whoever talks about passion,
           | inspiration, etc, is just talking throgh his/her hat. For 95
           | percent of the world population, some job is better than not
           | having a job.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
           | There are plenty of things which are more interesting than
           | consulting which is why most consultants actually use the
           | career as a stepping stone to go do what their clients were
           | doing.
        
           | anon7725 wrote:
           | If you are happy with your own life, you can CTRL+W on this
           | and all other navel-gazing internet fare.
        
         | giantg2 wrote:
         | "This means you can retire sooner and then use the free time to
         | find meaning."
         | 
         | Why does anyone have to find meaning?
        
       | tantalor wrote:
       | _The multiple views provide too much information! It 's
       | impossible to move! Calvin quickly tries to eliminate all but one
       | perspective!_
       | 
       | https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1990/06/17
        
         | chrisweekly wrote:
         | Ha! Thanks for this gem. Love it.
        
       | Henhound wrote:
       | Seem to be a lesswrong entrepreneur take on the question: Should
       | you orient yourself by pursuing what you want or by avoiding what
       | you don't want?
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | Humans can juggle more than one responsibility. If the thing
         | you don't want is insidious, you better be doing both.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-12-22 23:00 UTC)