pull down to refresh
1437 sats \ 4 replies \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears 13 Apr \ on: Some thoughts on success mostly_harmless
Wow. This is both a hell of a piece to think about, and one that's linked to a couple more (I literally zapped after reading the Stocker piece -- I'd never heard of him either -- and almost took a break before coming back and reading the rest; glad I didn't).
Like you, I'm not currently swept up, and I range from wanting to be, to wanting to not have to be (if that makes sense). I'm very good at my job in general, but it's not the sort of thing that leads to the feedback cycle Munger and O'Keefe talk about. But I'm also okay, I guess, with not being there. If I can enjoy my family and time with them and make a small part of the world slightly better, do I need to be swept up?
(And I'll take this over focusing on pure survival, of course).
I dunno. I guess the short answer is: This is giving me a lot to think about, and I'm about to spend some time diving into Stocker's blog to see if everything he's got is that good.
If I can enjoy my family and time with them and make a small part of the world slightly better, do I need to be swept up?
This is mostly where I'm at, too. Although, I wouldn't mind having a job that I was getting swept up in either.
Generally, I have very little desire to be the best whatever in wherever. I like being in a position to engage with such people, though, and am fortunate to have some of those opportunities.
reply
I like being in a position to engage with such people, though, and am fortunate to have some of those opportunities.
Being part of a good scene is worth a lot, I agree. That's an interesting way to look at it -- allocating your efforts to get you a ticket to those things, even if you're not necessarily the main player.
reply
I don't think I have the requisite hubris or arrogance to ever believe I was the foremost expert in anything of significance, even if it were arguably the case (which it isn't).
reply
and I range from wanting to be, to wanting to not have to be (if that makes sense)
Yup, that makes total sense. I know lots of people who are super capable but their lives are so rich outside of work that that's where they put their investment -- they are less "successful" by normal metrics, but as people they are super successful, and they're living lives they want. If I had a rich outside-work life I expect I'd probably be less angsty, too.
Although I've been wondering if angsty-ness is a trait more than a state thing, and this is how I'd be no matter what was going on.
reply