Linkedin posts from 2018, part one -
You are not sparing anyone's feelings when you don't tell the truth. Their feelings will be hurt anyway when they discover they were living a lie. Therefore, always tell the truth. It's pointless to do any otherwise.
Self-regulation assumes focus on the self, otherwise called selfishness. Therefore, it may be reasonable to say self-regulation either causes selfishness or manifests selfishness, or both are the same.
I was given too much stuff on professionalism in college. Most of that was BS. Who gets to decide what is professional? Is a gold-laden Gucci Mane less professional than a suit-and-tie Gucci? Is a psychologist in a crocodile mask less professional than one with a blazer on? There is no real definition of professionalism. How you conduct yourself is more of a brand/strategy issue. So long your conduct is aligned with your core values and vision, you are professional. Just do you.
Capitalism has the same issue as other systems: greed. Capitalism is great as long as the watchdogs are not greedy. Some day, a capitalist emerges who, with this power and influence, attempts to muddle with the free market. With help from sold-out watchdogs, he proposes regulations to make the market less competitive. The watchdogs, on the other hand, get to appeal to the proletariat with free stuff, such as free public education, and minimum wages.
Yes, even public education was pushed by industrialists. They could save on training costs if the public paid for it (in taxes that run public schools).
I do think that minimum wage should be illegal because it is anti-competitive. Talk about anti-trust. If Bezos is lobbying for a higher minimum wage for real, you know he is trying to protect his kingdom. A higher minimum wage would effectively raise the barrier to entry, making the market even less accessible, protecting the wealth of the wealthy.
Why did Socrates, Krishn, Ram, Jesus, and Buddha not write a book themselves? I am inclined to think that they understood that putting concepts into words also means reducing them into words. The moment you describe God in words, it is no longer God's description. The same goes with concepts like love, compassion, and friendship.
You must get out the constraints of language if you want to understand deeper truths and enjoy the infinite realm of intuition, arts, consciousness, logos, imagination, etc. You may not be able to describe friendship, love, or worship, but you can definitely do them, sing them, and dance them. Actions are continuous, but words are only discrete units of meaning.
Perhaps, these guys understood that humans would obediently stick to their words, which are reduced versions of what they wanted to tell, and would never utilize their faculties to seek the truth. They would grab the texts and become braindead.
When you deny help because you can't suck up your ego and insecurities, you treat sensitivity with non-reward, which extinguishes that behavior. On a large scale, you are programming society to become insensitive (Skinner's behavior modification). Next time, accept help when you actually need it. On the flip side, offer help without expectations when others need it. This would reward people who try asking for help.
Martin Seligman blames more than 10x increase (since 1950) in depression on three factors -
1. Extreme individualism and self-centeredness where the focus is individual success over societal success.
2. The self-Esteem movement, which teaches people to feel good about themselves irrespective of effort.
3. Victimhood mentality, which teaches people the blame game.
Zimbardo, P. G., Weber, A. L., & Johnson, R. L. (2003). Psychology: Core concepts (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
In college and while working at the high school [Starkville High], I could clearly see the self-esteem movement and victimhood mentality being hammered by leftist forces. I used to wonder how many criminals are produced by public education.
Ever wonder why people don't tell the truth when asked, "how are you?". Ever wondered why you don't tell the truth when asked the same. Not only they are thinking you don't care but you are also thinking that they don't care.
One of the reasons why people fake is that they have trust issues. They have already assumed that the other party is fake. And the other party has also assumed the same.
Now, I stick with people even after I find out that they are fake so they know that I am not going anywhere. This counter-social stance gives them an opportunity to get real.
Is the buyer gonna show up? Will the businesses be fair? Will the elected official represent my cause? Will she/he return my call? Will she/he reply to my text? Is he a real friend? Am I actually attractive or they are just being nice? Am I actually cool or they are being nice?
In a society where truth is downplayed, people ponder on these questions. When others do not respond or respond in politically correct ways, truth is lost. When truth is lost, people question other people's true motives. They have trouble trusting others. To all the above questions, the answers seem to be uncertain. When the blunt truth is not told, uncertainty rises. The individual has more uncertain questions to worry about.
This is the state of anxiety, which is common in the USA. I hypothesize that lack of truth has caused a lack of trust among the citizens, which breeds anxiety. Go tell the truth even if it offends people and hurts their feelings. Truth is a virtue that warrants these costs.
To control your mind may be a foolish idea. If you and your mind are two different things and you managed to control your mind, who then is gonna control you? A dictator can dictate a nation. Who then dictates the dictator? Another dictator? Who is watching him? If you and your mind are not different but the same, then to control your mind means to be totally controlled, in other words, to have no control at all. In both cases, we reach absurd conclusions.
When people demand government involvement, it may be a sign of ego and mistrust building up in society.
I said ego because when people are too egotistical to ask others for help, they turn to the government to force others to help them. They think they would have the last laugh, and I am like," just wait until you get stronger and influential. The government is coming after your ass."
I said mistrust because either the needy do not trust that others would help them or potential helpers do not think the needy deserve help. Again, the needy plead to the government to bully potential helpers. Once again, I am like," wait until the tables are turned."
The government was instituted to uphold the constitution. Everything else is really not its job. A democratic society is run by the people for the people. This means all charitable work, social work, etc should be done by the people, not by the government. If the government does everything, then society is no longer democratic but something like minority-over-majority rule or oligarchy.
A house of lies must fall no matter how grand it is. Truth is only what stays. I am often amazed at how cocky some leaders and people are.
They can not even accept a possibility of their establishments' eventual failure. This ego itself will drive them to destroy their establishments. These establishments are nations, religious institutions, and companies. Of course, they can grow so long they remain humble and hold truth as the utmost virtue. The moment one leader compromises for monetary or social gains, things start to slide in the wrong direction.
Egypt, Greece, Rome, the Mughal Empire, all fell. There is no establishment permanent, no matter how big. There is no point in being cocky.
Most self-help and productivity stuff is useless. After graduation, I read some non-academic texts. Yes! They are just garbage.
It seems that the field of education and scholarship probably has been hyperbolized by incentives of money and fame. More people have jumped to produce scholarship than they naturally should have. These extra people are not intrinsically driven. They produce garbage scholarship.
If one individual lacks productivity, there are definitely many more things than the individual's attitude (if there is such a thing). The attitude itself may be a product of his environment. The outside environment sets the default attitude, which is a function of culture, laws, technology, etc. I would say eat a balanced diet and tell the truth instead of saying "change your mindset".
And by the way, why does one need to improve oneself? Will anyone answer this question?
Religious people give me side-eyes when I announce my non-religiosity. I have to tell them that founders of all religions were also non-religious: Lao Tzu, Buddha, Ram, Krishn, and Jesus. All were non-religious.
Now, people on the other side call my arguments illegitimate when I quote from The Book of the Way, The Bhagavad Gita, and the Bible. They go, "what if all that never happened." To them, I have to explain that a true claim is independent of authority. If Gandalf says, "the sum of the squares of the two legs of a right triangle... the hypotenuse." It remains true even if Gandalf was entirely fictitious.
Debates on whether Ram, Krishna, and Jesus existed, on whether the events reported are true are entirely futile. If their claims can be logically defended, then the claims are truths whether they existed or not.
Throughout my little experience of life, I have rarely seen an unemployable person. Those with limited mental abilities and even animals seem to have an edge over machines. Whenever I study neuroscience, I wonder at the insane abilities of this machine called the human brain. The number of neural structures that the brain has far outmatches the most ambitious AI. Also, some areas of the brain are highly plastic, almost as if nothing is impossible for the human brain.
Yet somehow, machines and animals have become more employable. We have service dogs, therapy dogs, and whatnot! It is not that humans can't do what machines can do. It rather seems to be the case that human capital is heavily regulated, driving its price artificially higher.
Now, I am tired of people saying "the government needs to create more jobs" when in reality, it needs to get out of the way.
If there is an unmet need in society, it is probably because the suppliers have been pulled back by bureaucracy, not because there is an evil center of power hoarding resources.
He who argues, struggles and fights with you is your friend. He who quietly walks away thinks you aren't worth the struggle. Beware of the sweet talkers.
"Mind your own business." & "Why doesn't anyone care about me? Why am I invisible?"
"Don't say this/ that to me." & "No one talks to me. I guess, no one likes me."
"Leave me alone." & " Why am I always left alone?"
"Don't be so nosey." & "Why is everyone so indifferent, so insensitive?"
"Don't tell me what to do." & "Only if someone had told me about it, damn!"
Lately, it has occurred to me that people themselves feed into most mundane problems they face. They ask others to be insensitive and to not care but also wonder why others are insensitive. Every time you rewarded insensitivity and punished/ignored sensitivity, you were programming people to become insensitive. That's behavior modification on a large scale.
Another reason why it is pointless to find people like yourself to be friends with and marry is the mere impossibility of it. Do you just want to have the same place of belonging or the same eating habits too or the same religion too or the same occupation too? You see where this is going.
There is no end to it until you get to your clone. And guess what, you'll be terribly lonely with your clone because it is no different from being with yourself.
This entire similar to me/dissimilar to me game is self-made. It's a kind of an ego chase, which has no endpoint. And I see people perpetually stuck in it. How you define yourself determines who's similar to you. How you define yourself is your ego. The more ego you have, the more you define yourself in fixed ways, making you artificially different from others.
If you truly want to understand and befriend others, give up your ego. The more of it you lose, the more you'll find yourself in others, the less being with different kinds of people (whatever that means) will bother you.
I am tired of people telling me to find my kind of people and become friends with them.
That is a fatal social strategy. What would happen if we have only liberals running a nation? An Orwellian nightmare! What would happen if we have only conservatives running a nation? A theocracy. Both have failed to develop a nation as successful and prosperous as a democratic republic (a mix of both).
When someone engages with only his kind, growth prospects end right there. It's like a company with employees that are photocopies of one another. No one can offer more than what one individual can. This is why we want diversity of opinions and interests in social, economic, and political institutions.
A friend circle that has only one kind is doomed to fail altogether. A society that has only one kind of people is doomed to fail altogether. And don't even get me started on the ego instilling that happens when people serve themselves with similar people. A man who avoids conflicts is doomed to fail, for it is only via conflicts that he can either reevaluate his false beliefs or sharpen his right ones.