• Home
  • Articles
  • Podcast
  • Book/Programs
  • Work With Me
  • Sign In My Account
Menu

The Everyday Athlete

Street Address
City, State, Zip
Phone Number
Working with Everyday Athlete to Improve Their Physique and Performance

Your Custom Text Here

The Everyday Athlete

  • Home
  • Articles
  • Podcast
  • Book/Programs
  • Work With Me
  • Sign In My Account

The Artist's Journey - Steven Pressfield

February 23, 2022 Conor O'Neill

The Artist's Journey - Steven Pressfield

3-Sentence Summary:

The hero’s journey is the archetypical story seen across cultures where you are called to action from the ordinary world to the extraordinary world and into the belly of the beast, where you experience trials and tribulations, after which you come back home with the gift of your experience and the lessons learnt, to give back to the people.

The artist’s journey comes after the hero’s journey, and is like the hero’s journey, but can be seen as your true calling, where your gift to the people this time is your works.

The artist’s journey is a journey of self-discovery as much as self-expression, and will ultimately provide meaning to your life.

Notes:

  • The hero’s journey is the archetypical story seen across cultures where you are called to action from the ordinary world to the extraordinary world and into the belly of the beast, where you experience trials and tribulations, after which you come back home with the gift of your experience and the lessons learnt, to give back to the people.

  • This hero’s journey is a formative experience, which is ultimately preparing us for the next phase, that artist’s journey.

  • The artist’s journey is like the hero’s journey, but is more about expressing your ‘true self’. The gift you give to the people in this case is your works.

  • The artist’s work has a theme and a subject, but this is revealed along the way as a result of following your interests, rather than something you decide from the beginning.

  • An artist has a medium, point of view, a style, and is in touch with the times.

  • “What is personal to the artist is universal to the rest of us.

  • The artist’s journey is more about self-discovery than self-expression.

  • Every piece of work is a hero’s journey. Resistance is a mini refusal to the call.

  • The artist learns how to start, how to keep going, and how to finish.

  • The artist’s job is to make the unconscious conscious. It is also the recognition of beauty and the articulation of empathy for others.

  • The meaning of your life will be contained within your artist’s journey.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Do the Work - Steven Pressfield

January 31, 2022 Conor O'Neill

Do the Work - Steven Pressfield

3-Sentence Summary:

At the start of any creative project (a book, business, painting, play, podcast etc.), the focus should be on starting before you’re ready, outlining the project in a 3-act structure, staying stupid and stubborn and having blind faith to get momentum going, through the initial resistance.

Once you’ve got going, the focus should be on “covering the canvas” (getting the first rough draft done), and refining this over time, until you hit the inevitable “wall” at which point you must identify the problem, and work the problem, until it’s done.

Once you’re done, the next part is to ship, get your work out there, and expose yourself to that which you fear - failure and success - after which you must start your next project, again, before you’re ready.

Notes:

  • In any creative task, we have enemies and allies.

  • Your enemies include resistance, rational thought, and friends & family.

  • Your allies include staying stupid, being stubborn, blind faith, passion, assistance, and friends & family.

  • When starting your creative task, the issue isn't lack of information or the difficulty of the task, the resources you have, or the position you find yourself in. It's overcoming the resistance of starting.

  • In order to account for this, remember the importance of starting before you're ready.

  • Give yourself a research diet of 3 books so you can't procrastinate in research. Also, only do research outside of your core working hours.

  • Make your project fit an A4 page, using a 3-act structure, starting with the finish in mind, if that's easier.

  • Once you've overcome the hurdle of starting, use the A4 paper and 3-act structure, and fill in the gaps, creating 7-8 key highs/lows.

  • Then, "cover the canvas", meaning getting your first full rough draft done.

  • This is a time for getting everything down on paper, suspending all judgement in the moment, leaving in the ridiculous and silly stuff.

  • Once you've built that out, make sure to re-ask yourself "What this is about?", and "What's missing?" - then fill in the gaps.

  • Momentum has now been built, but inevitably, you'll hit "the wall", or the "belly of the beast". This could be in the form of running out of money, getting demotivated, people hating your draft, listening to your own doubt etc.

  • Once you've hit the wall, you must return to the allies of stupidity, stubbornness, and blind faith.

  • Now, you must also remember that the problem is not a reflection of you as a person.

  • The problem is the problem. the problem isn't some spiritual, ineffable life issue. It's something mechanical and practical within the project. Your job at this point is to identify the problem, and work the problem! This is usually in the 3 act structure from the beginning.

  • This is the re-writing element in the example of writing.

  • Once you're done, now comes the hardest part - Shipping.

  • This is hard because it exposes you to criticism and failure.

  • But more than that, there is the fear of success, and the discomfort of who'll you become.

  • However, once you've overcome that and shipped, not shipping will never beat you again. There'll still be resistance to it, but it won't beat you.

  • You'll have joined an invisible fraternity of people in society who have created something from nothing and put it out there.

  • Then, once you've shipped, it's time to start the next project, before you're ready.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Turning Pro - Steven Pressfield

January 25, 2022 Conor O'Neill

Turning Pro - Steven Pressfield

3-Sentence Summary:

Overcoming the Resistance you feel towards accomplishing something important requires that you “turn pro”.

This involves following your true ambition, creating the work you want to create, showing up every day, and being patient.

Ultimately, turning pro must become manifest as a practice, a somewhat repetitive but consistent ritual, from which the creative process can take place.

Notes:

  • When you find yourself disliking your life or yourself, there are a few ways of thinking about it. One is that you’re ill in some way and need a cure or medication. Another is good and evil, where you are doing something wrong and therefore are being punished. Another, presented here, is that you are living as an amateur when you should be a pro.

  • When you turn pro, you find your inner voice and self-respect, and are able to live the life you've always wanted to but were afraid to.

  • "To feel ambition and act on it is to embrace the unique calling of your soul."

  • Sometimes, when you're afraid to embrace your true calling, you'll embrace a shadow calling instead, and therefore live a shadow life. This calling/life may be somewhat similar to our true calling, but will not entail any risk and will have us following goals we don't truly want to.

  • The difference between the amateur and the professional is in their habits.

  • Living as an amateur can lead to addiction in various forms, as you try to achieve the feeling that you would feel from following your calling and creating what it is you want to create. Addicts try to either transcend the pain of resistance or anaesthetise it.

  • We are all amateurs at some point, but we must make the choice to turn pro.

  • Amateurs are afraid and let that hold them back. Pros are also afraid, but what differentiates them is how they act in the face of fear.

  • Qualities of the professional:

    • The professional shows up every day

    • The professional stays on the job all day

    • The professional is committed over the long haul

    • For the professional, the stakes are high and real

    • The professional is patient

    • The professional seeks order

    • The professional demystifies

    • The professional acts in the face of fear

    • The professional accepts no excuses

    • The professional plays it as it lays

    • The professional is prepared

    • The professional does not show off

    • The professional dedicates himself to mastering technique

    • The professional does not hesitate to ask for help

    • The professional does not take failure or success personally

    • The professional does not identify with his or her instrument

    • The professional ensures adversity

    • The professional self-validates

    • The professional reinvents himself

    • The professional is recognized by other professionals

    • A professional is courageous

    • The professsional will not be distracted

    • The professional is ruthless with himself

    • The professional has compassion for himself

    • The professional lives in the present

    • The professional defers gratification

    • The professional does not wait for inspiration

    • The professional does not give his power away to others

    • The professional helps others

  • To defeat the self-sabotaging habit of procrastination, self-doubt, susceptibility to distraction, perfectionism, and shallowness, [the pro] enlists self-strengthening habits of order, regularity, discipline, and a constant striving after excellence.

  • This may seem boring and like it takes away the magic of inspiration and flashes of genius, but in fact, this allows for these things to come through. "The humble produces the sublime".

  • Artists and entrepreneurs (or anyone really) who turns pro gets 2 salaries: financial and psychological.

  • Turning pro must become a daily practice, and this practice generally includes a specfic space, time, and intention, and should be approached both as a warrior (ready to face the inevitable resitance) and with humility (“we have the right to our labour, but not to the fruits of our labour”).

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

The War of Art - Steven Pressfield

January 6, 2022 Conor O'Neill

The War of Art - Steven Pressfield

3-Sentence Summary:

What holds most people back from pursuing their artistic, professional, lifestyle, or other, goals is Resistance.

Resistance can manifest as fear, procrastination, addictive behaviours, negative self-talk, depression, and ultimately not doing the work required to move towards becoming your best self and living the life you want to live.

Resistance can be overcome by 'becoming a professional': showing up every day no matter what, doing the work in spite of fear, self-doubt, and rationalisation that you should be doing something else, delaying gratification, and doing this consistently, knowing that through doing so, inspiration will follow and that you will contribute your unique work to the world.

Notes:

  • It's not doing the work (writing for example) that's hard. It's sitting down to do it. What stops us from sitting down to do it can be called "Resistance".

  • Resistance holds us back from living our unlived life, and can therefore be toxic, if not dealt with properly.

  • Resistance can be experienced in any calling including writing, painting, creating music, pursuing business ventures, starting a diet or training plan, beating addiction, education, relationships, and moral or religious change.

  • Resistance's aim is to distract you from doing your work.

  • The more important your calling is, the more resistance you will feel.

  • Everyone feels resistance, and it doesn't go away with experience.

  • Resistance only obstructs you from moving in a positive direction, so can be used as an indication that you should move towards the work for which you are experiencing Resistance.

  • Resistance is most powerful the closer you get to finishing the project.

  • Resistance can come in the form of other people telling you, explicitly or implicitly, that you shouldn't be pursuing the goal.

  • Procrastination is the most common manifestation of Resistance. You may start to think you need to wait for the perfect time or wait until you sort out another aspect of your life. This procrastination needs to be overcome or it can become a habit.

  • Resistance can come in the form of self-destructive habits like addiction, a victimhood mentality, and choosing to be around people who you deep down know will let you get away with not becoming your best self.

  • If you let it take over, it can ultimately result in unhappiness, boredom, lack of satisfaction, and even depression.

  • Criticism of others, self-doubt, and fear are common indicators that you are experiencing Resistance.

  • Rationalisation is the right-hand man of Resistance, and there will always be a way to rationalise not doing your work.

  • Overcoming Resistance requires you to become a professional. "I write only when inspiration strikes. Fortunately, it strikes every morning at nine o'clock sharp."

  • Turning professional requires:

    • 1. Showing up every day.

    • 2. Showing up no matter what.

    • 3. Staying on the job all day.

    • 4. Committing over the long haul.

    • 5. Keeping the stakes high and real.

    • 6. Accepting remuneration for your labour.

    • 7. Not overidentifying with your job.

    • 8. Mastering the technique of your job.

    • 9. Having a sense of humour about your job.

    • 10. Receiving praise or blame in the real world.

  • The professional does it for the love of the game, not just for the money.

  • The professional uses delayed gratification, rather than getting overly enthusiastic at the start and stopping when the entusiasm wanes.

  • The professional has some distance from the work, not identifying with the work, or its success or failure, but rather seeing it as an instrument, from which he/she is seperate, but must master the technique of playing.

  • You can even think of yourself as an employee of “You Inc.”, meaning that you are a worker in this enterprise, rather than being the enterprise itself.

  • You can't wait for inspiration (or the Muse) to show up. You must act as a professional and the inspiration will come.

  • Resistance feeds on fear. On the surface, it's the fear that you will fail, be unhappy and miserable, and ultimately, die. But the real fear is that you will succeed, because then you will have the responsibility of living up to this ideal.

  • An artist should not define himself/herself hierarchically, competing against others and evaluating happiness based on rank. But rather he/she should think territorially, owning the space that is uniquely yours, and working to grow it.

  • A 'hack' condescends to his/her audience, asking not "What do I want to write?", but "What is the market looking for?".

  • "You have the right to your labour, but not to the fruit of your labour". You must do the work for its own sake, and allow the chips to fall where they may in terms of money and praise.

  • Creative work is not a selfish act, but a gift to the world, and you shouldn't rob the world of your contribution.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Thinking, Fast and Slow - Daniel Kahneman

October 29, 2021 Conor O'Neill
2020-08-12 05.16.14 1.jpg

Thinking, Fast and Slow - Daniel Kahneman

3-Sentence Summary:

We think in 2 systems (system 1 and 2), of which the first is fast, immediate, automatic, intuitive, and of which the second is more slow, thoughtful, logical, and effortful, with both them working together to make decisions, while hopefully avoiding the biases, fallacies, and excessive narratives that we can often fall prey to.

Humans are not “Econs” (rational, selfish and unchanging economic decision-makers focussed only on the outcome): expected utility, regret, possibility effects, and certainty effects also factor into our decisions.

Our “two selves”, the experiencing self (you in the moment), and the remembering self (you when you think about your life as a story), work together to determine the quality of your life with “experienced well-being” and you “life evaluation” being two separate but connected elements of that.

Notes:

  • We think in 2 systems

    • System 1: Thinking fast: Automatic, immediate, intuitive, often effortless, impulsive, usually our first reaction.

    • System 2: Thinking slow: Thoughtful, slow, often effortful, somewhat logical, usually interjects when system 1 can’t do that job and then usually has the final say, even though it is heavily influenced by system 1.

  • System 2 can require effort/discipline and may only have a certain amount of bandwidth, beyond which ego depletion can occur (a decrease in our ability to maintain discipline), which can be sped up by tiredness and complexity/difficulty of task, and performance can diminish in subsequent tasks as a result.

  • For this reason, the ability to use system 2 is often related to our ability to delay gratification.

  • Practice and increased skill can make things more automatic (delegating to system 1) decreasing the demand on system 2.

  • There are times where system 2 tasks don’t require so much effort, such as when we are in “Flow” - A state of effortless concentration, losing the sense of time, yourself, and problems.

  • Priming - words, images, sounds etc influence how we think and act. What are we/society exposing ourselves to? E.g. Hearing words associated with old people can make us walk more slowly. E.g. smiling can make us answer questions more positively.

  • Cognitive ease - System 1 tends to be used more when we’re happy, at ease, in a familiar environment, and clear on what’s happening. Even something as simple as presenting a message with easy to read font makes it more believable. The opposite brings system 2 into play, and things get analysed more.

  • Narrative fallacy - We create narratives to represent the world more clearly and make it possible for us to operate (system 1), even if we are reducing logic (system 2). System 2 can be trained to recognise this and intervene when needed. Confidence in prediction is likely to simply be a result of a well-constructed narrative.

  • WYSIATI - “What you see is all there is” - We tend to forget about the information we don’t have and emphasise the importance of the information we do have.

  • Small samples tend to have more variability/unreliability, since larger samples even out the anomalies, but we tend to create a narrative around the anomaly and prioritise it.

  • Affect heuristic - When we don’t know how to answer a question or approach a situation, we ask an easier question, which will usually involve how we feel about the situation. E.g. “Will x company survive?” Becomes “Do I like the product/owner?”.

  • Anchoring - The first number we hear affects the answer we give to a subsequent question, or where we start with negotiation.

  • Availability bias - we search our minds for recent occurrences to inform our opinion on the matter. The more recent, the more emotive, and the higher number of examples all lead to more buy-in (availability cascade). 2 plane crashes on the news increases our predictions of subsequent plane crashes regardless of the overall statistics.

  • Adding detail to something can make it seem more likely, whilst actually decreasing the likelihood. E.g. Independently, men (of any age) dying of a heart attack will be rated as less likely than a man over 50 dying of a heart attack, even though the former includes the latter.

  • Striking visual examples are far more convincing than statistics (System 1 vs. system 2).

  • Regression to the mean - The further something is from the mean, the more likely the next will be closer to the mean. E.g. The biggest pup of the litter is likely to grow up to have a pup that will grow up to be smaller than it was. E.g. If you’ve had a really good sales month, presume that the next month will be closer to your previous mean. We often think the opposite.

  • Because system 1 is easily fooled by these biases and heuristics, we should look at the likelihood of something being true (base rates) (system 2), rather than trusting our feelings (representativeness) (system 1).

  • Where we can replace human judgements with a logical formula for decision making, strongly consider it.

  • Human expert intuition can be trusted in cases where the area is sufficiently regular/replicative, there is a feedback loop, and there has been enough time to learn from it.

  • We should take an “outside view” using previous cases/data rather than falling to a “planning fallacy” or inside view that is usually a best-case scenario.

  • Optimism is needed for entrepreneurs etc, but this does end up in failure more often than not, showing that it is often over-confidence. Doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do it, but should be aware of the risks.

  • Humans are not Econs (rational, selfish, consistent decision-makers, as they’re often thought to be by economists). Our decisions are also majorly affected by emotions.

  • Expected utility theory - We don’t see the absolute risks/payoffs, we see the extra potential utility to us. E.g. £100 to someone who has £5 is different to someone who has £500. Useful but not sufficient.

  • Prospect theory - calculates the weighted chance of winning x amount (90% chance of winning £100 = £90. 100% chance of winning £90 = £90). This doesn’t take into account human emotion (disappointment, regret, certainty etc), as the first case (high chance of winning £100), is obviously very different to the latter example (definitely winning £90).

  • Also, the prospect of a loss affects us more negatively than the same gain does positively, leading to loss aversion.

  • The further away the gain/loss is from baseline, the less extra utility we expect. E.g. For most people, there is a much bigger difference in £1000 vs £2000 than there is in £1000000 vs £101000.

  • There is also more to the decision weighting theory. These become visible at the extremes:

    • Due to the “Certainty Effect”, we are:

      • Risk-averse in potential gains when the probability is high (moving from 95% chance to 100% chance) - willing to forego some potential extra pay-off to go from a maybe to a definite (take lower settlement than expected rather than going to court, even if likely to win).

      • Risk-averse in potential losses when the probability is low (moving from 5% chance to 0% chance) - willing to pay extra to give certainty of no loss (buying insurance).

    • Due to the “Possibility Effect”, we are:

      • Risk-seeking in potential gains when the probability is low (moving from 0% chance to 5% chance) - willing to pay extra to go from no chance to some chance (buying a lottery ticket).

      • Risk-seeking in potential losses when the probability is high (moving from 100% chance to 95% chance) - willing to pay extra to go from definite loss to some chance (rejecting a good settlement in court in a last-ditch effort to get away with not paying, when I’m likely going to have to pay “a lot” whether I’m found guilty or take the settlement).

  • If we have the chance to replicate in the above scenarios, we should have an outside view in order to avoid foregoing more money than we should have, or missing out on potential gains.

  • The possibility of regret is weighted more than the possibility of gain.

  • For this reason, we over-weight the probability of negative rare events, because we don’t want to regret not over-reacting.

  • We also tend to not veer from our usual actions, as making the decision to do so would cause more regret if something were to go wrong as a result in comparison to something going wrong after sticking to our normal actions.

  • We shouldn’t fall into a “Sunk-cost fallacy”, where we’re basing our future decisions on trying to correct the regret of our previous poor decisions. We should ask what is the right decision going forward.

  • If we’re able to remind ourselves of the fact that we knew there were risks before going in, regret can be lessened.

  • When we see individual cases, we’re more likely to use system 1 (emotional). When we compare it to other cases, we engage system 2 (more rational. E.g. Donate to dolphins vs. donate to farmers. When asked individually, people donate more to dolphins, when asked together, people donate more to farmers. We should aim to not see situations in isolation, but compare to the bigger picture.

  • The exact same final outcome/risk will elicit a different response if it is framed as a win/keep/lose, opt-in/opt-out etc. We can use this to our advantage in framing our decisions, but should be wary of it being used against us.

  • There are two selves:

    • The experiencing self - you in the moment, who you are as you are doing things.

    • The remembering self - you when you think about your life as a story. 

  • We rationally say we want long more pleasure that is longer-lasting, and pain to be short-lived, but our decisions predominantly take into account the most intense moments (peak), and the feeling we had as the experience was ending, (peak-end rule) whereas duration doesn’t affect the decision much (duration neglect). E.g. Cold water challenge that lasts longer but ends with warm water will be chosen over a shorter challenge with no warm water at the end.

  • In this way, we prioritise our remembering self, allowing ourselves to experience more total pain, as long as the peak is lower, and the ending is pleasant.

  • In the same way again, higher life evaluation is not as simple as the sum of the individual moments of experienced well-being (i.e. it is not about “feeling happy all the time”). E.g. Positive things that happened recently, having kids, more money, better education can all lead to you having a higher evaluation of your life (remembering self) even if your experienced well-being (experiencing self) on a day-to-day basis isn’t always positive. There is obviously still a balance between the 2 selves, and happiness isn’t simple. We need to look after both, because one affects the other.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Flow - Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

October 26, 2021 Conor O'Neill

Flow - Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

3-Sentence Summary:

The quality of your life is the quality of your internal experience.

You optimise this by being in a “Flow-State”, which is found during experiences where you are voluntarily being challenged to the limits of your skills, in a way that causes you to lose a sense of time, yourself, and external issues.

This “Flow” can be seen as synonymous with the feeling of ‘meaning’, and aiming to experience this as much as possible, through your work and your relationships (with yourself and others), is likely to lead to a more enjoyable and meaningful life.

Notes:

  • The quality of your life is dependent on your inner experience.

  • We don’t optimise this by searching for happiness. We optimise it by aiming to be fully involved in each moment.

  • The best moments are of those where the mind is stretched to its limits in a voluntary effort to do something difficult and worthwhile.

  • When we are so involved in something so much that nothing else seems to matter and time flies by quickly, it can be said that we are in a “flow-state”.

  • We must engage with our inner experience so that we don’t become controlled by our biological urges (which can be exploited, and subject to addiction) nor to blindly follow social norms (which can be overly restrictive.) Either of these has the potential to replace our religious proclivities.

  • We only have so much ‘psychic energy’ - bandwidth to process information.

  • Having too much going on, to the point of being distracted from what we want to be focussing on is known as “psychic entropy” - inner disorder.

  • The opposite, when the information coming in is fully aligned with what we’re doing is “flow” when “psychic energy flows effortlessly”. We should aim for more of this.

  • “Flow experiences” tend to make the ‘self’ more complex through both differentiation of the self from others, and from integration of the self within itself, the outside world, and other people.

  • Flow makes the present more enjoyable, but also leads to greater contribution and self-confidence.

  • We should aim to make external conditions match our goals by both improving the external conditions, and by changing how we feel about external conditions.

  • Pleasure comes from satisfying our biological needs (hunger etc.). Enjoyment comes from novelty and forward movement.

  • Enjoyable experience: A challenging activity, that requires skills that we have, which we can concentrate on, which has goals and immediate feedback, which removes focus on other things, which you feel in control over, in which the self disappears, but emerges stronger, and which alters the experience of time.

  • Flow activities provide a sense of discovery, pushing the person to new levels of performance and consciousness, ultimately making the self more complex.

  • Flow is where we’re on the line between our current level of skill and the challenge in front of us. Too much skill and not enough challenge = boredom. Not enough skill and too much challenge = anxiety and frustration.

  • The evolutionary purpose may be to encourage skill development, which should lead to a better society.

  • If the cultural goals match the goals and skills of the people, we have a “great game”.

  • Some people naturally have more of an “autotelic personality” - they can experience flow more easily than others - but this can be encouraged by family and societal values of clarity, centring, commitment, choice, challenge, and can also be developed by individuals (e.g. Frankl, Solzhenitsyn)

  • Bodily functions can lead to flow experiences (exercise, sex, eating, seeing beauty etc.) but only if we acquire the skills and do them well. We should also be careful not to become addicted to these, as they can take psychic energy from other things.

  • To keep producing flow, we must:  

    • 1. Set goals with milestones/subgoals.

    • 2. Measure progress.

    • 3. Concentrate on what we’re doing during the process.

    • 4. Develop skills to match opportunities.

    • 5. Raise stakes if the activity becomes boring.

  • The mind can be a portable, life-ordering, entertainment tool, if we’re able to use it to bring order to our view of the world, through our interest in things like science, history, philosophy, etc. (thinking about life’s big questions when bored). We should follow our interests in these pursuits and be ok with being ‘dilettantes’ (amateurs) rather than thinking we always have to be professionals.

  • Work can provide flow, but only if we take control of it, find opportunities for development, and challenge and engage fully.

  • The same can be said for leisure activities, but often both are used passively, leading to us feeling out of control, wasteful etc.

  • Obviously, jobs should be more suited to this, but we should aim to be autotelic regardless, rather than waiting for the jobs to change.

  • Our quality of life depends on 2 main factors:

    • How we experience work.

    • How we experience relationships.

  • Loneliness is inherently tough, evolutionarily leading to no access to resources, and exile from the group and the protections it provides.

  • How you control your mind in solitude will have a big impact on life quality. Often this can be drugs, mindless entertainment, social media etc.

  • The First immediate social group is family, where we want to create flow through shared goals in line with skills. Then friends, where more effort is required to maintain contact vs family, where you’re not living together for example, and we experience a different kind of flow, since we are somewhat free of our role in the family, and are more so on a similar journey to our friends. Then flow might be experienced in the greater community’s challenges after sorting these 2.

  • Subjective experience is not just one aspect of life. It is life. Material conditions are secondary. They only affect us indirectly by way of experience.

  • Some people can go through terrible events and turn them in positive, while others turn small negative experiences into catastrophes.

  • Those who turn negative into positive are autotelic. They tend to:

    • Have unconscious self-assurance. 

    • Focus on the world rather than themselves.

    • Discover new solutions.

  • “Meaning” can be seen as synonymous with Flow. We want our life to become a flow experience, challenging ourselves in line with our skills, bringing order to the mind by integrating one’s actions with one’s goals, and becoming more complex.

  • Meaning will come from different things at different stages. First, preservation of self, then becoming part of the community, then individualisation from the community, then reintegration.

  • “Goals justify the effort they demand at the offset, but later it’s the effort that justifies the goals.”

  • Life themes, discovered from personal struggle with the search for meaning, or accepted from society/others, will direct our life and give each act and event meaning, good or bad.

  • We can discover these life themes from our own negative experiences, as well as from wisdom of the past (books, arts, religions, history, biographies etc.) - There’s no need to start from scratch in our own search for life themes/meaning.

  • Ultimately, we also want our own mission to be in line with the mission/purpose/flow experience of everything and everyone else.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Talking to Strangers - Malcolm Gladwell

October 20, 2021 Conor O'Neill

Talking to Strangers - Malcolm Gladwell

3-Sentence Summary:

There will inevitably be times where we have to communicate with strangers, but we struggle with various aspects of doing so.

We think we’re much better judges of people than we are, we often ‘default to truth’ in situations of uncertainty, we complicate interactions by using alcohol irresponsibly, we read too much into facial expressions, and we persecute others for making these same mistakes.

Instead, we should forgive others for ‘defaulting to truth’ realising that its advantages (e.g. giving people the benefit of the doubt) outweigh the effect of rare tragic cases, we should accept our own inabilities to decipher the intent of actions of people accurately, and we should put barriers into place to cap the downside of these things, where possible.

Notes:

  • The book is about the translation strategies we use with communicating with strangers.

  • The first question is, "why can't we tell when someone is lying?"

  • The second question is, "How is it that meeting someone can make you a worse judge of their character?" e.g. Chamberlain meeting Hitler and presuming he was a ‘good guy’. e.g. Court cases where computers are 25% better at predicting re-offenders than judges.

  • We think we know a lot about others based on their actions, even judging them more than we judge ourselves. E.g. We think word association tests don't say much about ourselves when we take them, but read a lot into them when looking at the results of other people.

  • In situations of uncertainty with regards to judging whether people are lying, we 'default to truth' more often than not.

  • However, this is true only until a point where there is overwhelming evidence of someone being untruthful. e.g. Spies get away with their deceptions for years, in spite of clues along the way, but only until there is overwhelming evidence.

  • Evolutionarily, we default to the truth because its advantageousness to efficient communication outweighs the effect of the rare case of deception.

  • The 'holy fool' has the role in society of being that person to call out the deception. e.g. Whistleblowers. e.g. The child in the story of the Emperor's new clothes

  • Defaulting to truth occurs more when the alternative is extreme, since it requires more of a leap to believe the opposite. e.g. Cases where men who are overly friendly with young people and spend a lot of time with them turn out to be paedophiles. It's much easier to just presume they're being friendly than to think they're abusing young people. Again, this is only until the evidence of the opposite is overwhelming.

  • We tend to wonder, "How dis people not see it?" in cases like the above, and persecute people for that, not realising that we actually want them to default to truth for the most part, in spite of these tragic outlier cases.

  • We think we're better at making decisions about people when we have more info and specifically, can see their faces. E.g. Judges in court cases would prefer to see the faces of the people they're questioning, in spite of this actually decreasing accuracy of the rulings.

  • But often, facial expressions are misleading.

  • The emotions associated with facial displays vary drastically in different societies.

  • Also, we often don't make the faces associated with emotions in actual situations. e.g. When we're surprised in a real situation, we often don't have the typically thought-of "surprised" face.

  • There are people for whom their expressions are generally 'mismatched' meaning they could be lying and showing no signs or vice versa. We're bad at judging those people but good at judging those whose facial expressions match those that society expects. But we obviously don't know which people fall into each category.

  • The effect of alcohol used to be seen as disinhibiting, but recent thought is that it is actually more related to narrowing our emotional and mental focus of vision - myopia.

  • How alcohol affects our interaction will be largely dependant on culture and the drinking customs. E.g. Some tribes will have rituals with rules of not drinking alone, only having one drink at a time, and only on weekends.

  • This differs drastically from somewhere like a college campus, where alcohol is abundant and without limitations of when, where, and how much to drink.

  • The latter has huge implications around sexual consent. Can we expect proper consent when people are in an alcohol-rich environment, in which they are emotionally focussed on that one moment, and where they may not even be able to remember it, such as in common cases of 'blackout'?

  • This is further complicated by the fact that women get to this point at a much lower alcohol consumption level than men.

  • When talking to strangers, we may never know the real truth, and going to extreme measures to find out can actually hinder that rather than help. E.g. Torture can actually lead to false confessions.

  • 'Coupling' is the idea that people's behaviour is connected to the context they're in. Where we presume that if we removed the person from the context, they'd find a way of doing the same thing, this is not often the case. E.g. In previous centuries, a lot of suicide was done through the type of gas that was used in houses. Some thought that changing to a less deadly type of gas would mean people would just find another way of committing suicide, but in fact, when they changed it, suicide decreased dramatically.

  • There are examples of going against 'default to truth'. E.g. Training police officers to be overly suspicious, patrolling and checking people randomly and more frequently, as well as looking for other crimes along with those that they're suspicious of. Instead of helping, this can lead to worse mistakes in communications with others, such as unlawful arrests and the eventual distrust of law enforcement in general.

  • In the modern world, we have to talk to strangers, but we often make mistakes, so what should we do?

  • Don't penalise each other for defaulting to truth, as its benefits outweigh its downsides - We all want to be given the benefit of the doubt.

  • Accept our own inability to decipher others accurately.

  • Put barriers in place, where possible, to help remove some of the potential downsides of defaulting to truth.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

David & Goliath - Malcolm Gladwell

October 6, 2021 Conor O'Neill
IMG_20211004_150638.jpg

David & Goliath - Malcolm Gladwell

3-Sentence Summary:

Being in the perceived position of ‘underdog’ often comes with advantages, including being forced to compensate for a disability or lack of skill (e.g. there is a relatively high proportion of CEOs who are dyslexic), having to adapt after surviving potentially harmful events (e.g. war survivors), and having the freedom to use unconventional tactics (since you’ve got nothing to lose).

The use of power by the powerful often follows a U-shaped curve, where more use eventually leads to diminishing returns, and ultimately if pushed too far, can result in the loss of power completely, when people becoming unwilling to follow the demands of the powerful.

The powerful are never as powerful as they seem, since they're open to the vulnerability of overusing and losing that power, and the weak are never as weak as they seem, since they have unseen advantages, if they can find a way to use them.

Notes:

  • We often think about the disadvantages of being an underdog, but often the underdog has hidden advantages, including being underestimated and being forced to become resourceful.

  • Often, when the underdog resorts to unconventional tactics, they will win. e.g. Underpowered militaries win wars more often than not. However, this is only true when they fight unconventionally. e.g. Using a full-court press in basketball can be shown to be an effective tactic for less skilled teams.

  • However, these strategies are often difficult, effortful, and require an element of desperation, which means they usually don't usually end up being sustainable.

  • The concept of a U-shaped curve describes how too much of a good thing is better, but only up to a point, after which more does not equal better, and more again starts to become disadvantageous. e.g. Size is usually an advantage, but Goliath (from the David and Goliath Story) was too big, causing him to be immobile, slow, and potentially even subject to disability caused by his giantism. e.g. Having enough money to provide for your children is a good thing, but having too much money can ultimately lead to difficulties with discipline and lack of constraints.

  • It is often better to be the big fish in a small point than a small fish in a big pond. e.g. Impressionist painters couldn't get a look-in in traditional galleries, so started their own, where they were the stars, and people flocked to see them. Even those their fans were fewer, there were fewer 'fish'. e.g. The best students in mediocre universities outperform good students at elite universities.

  • In any hierarchy of people, there will inevitably be those who rank at the bottom of that hierarchy. It is better for everyone if that bottom group have things that they excel at outside of the hierarchy. e.g. Athletes at elite universities don't suffer from being at the bottom of the class, since they have sport to rely on for self-esteem. Hence, universities don't mind letting some athletes in based on sporting achievement rather than academics.

  • Some disadvantages, such as dyslexia, can result in advantages, through forcing the development of other useful skills and traits. e.g. Many CEOs are dyslexic, which is perhaps linked to the personality trait of disagreeableness that they've potentially acquired through learning how to be more indifferent to what others think.

  • However, the same potential disadvantage can adversely affect one group and benefit another. e.g. Whilst Dyslexia is prevalent in CEOs, it is also prevalent in criminals. e.g. War can kill or traumatise people who are directly affected, but strengthens the survivors, or 'close misses'. e.g. A lot of both geniuses (and criminals) have suffered from losing a parent during childhood.

  • In addition to the advantages of compensating for a disability (e.g. dyslexics), and experiencing potentially catastrophic events as near misses, a further advantage for underdogs is the ability to be a trickster, which comes with having the freedom to break the rules because you have nothing to lose. e.g. Faking credentials for a job interview. e.g. Protestors agitating the police and setting up photos to be posted to the press.

  • For people to follow authority, they have to feel: 1. that they will be heard if they speak up. 2. that the rules will be predictable and consistently imposed, and 3. that one group won't be treated differently to the others (there is an element of fairness).

  • The use of power follows a U-shaped curve, where more use leads to diminishing returns, and ultimately if pushed too far, can result in the loss of power. Enforcing punishment is useful until it's done so much that it has a major effect on the population affected or until people begin to dislike the enforcer. e.g. Use of police force in high-crime neighbourhoods decreases crime up to a certain point, up until a point of overuse, where the people turn against the police and perform more crime.

  • The powerful are never as powerful as they seem, since they're open to the vulnerability of overusing and losing that power, and the weak are never as weak as they seem, since they have unseen advantages if they can find a way to use them.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Outliers - Malcolm Gladwell

September 29, 2021 Conor O'Neill
IMG_20210831_131109.jpeg

Outliers - Malcolm Gladwell

3-Sentence Summary:

Success in a given area comes down to many factors, and these factors are multiplicative, meaning that those who are already at an advantage (through having talent, for example) are likely to be more exposed to further benefits (e.g. scholarship programs).

Mastery in an area generally comes from spending a lot of time practising it (approximately 10,000 hours, some studies show), and those who accumulate 10,000 hours generally do so as a result of a combination of their own interests, seeking out these opportunities, talent, where they were born, and who they know.

Some of these factors, such as time spent practising, learning social skills, etc. are more in our control than others like our I.Q. and where we were born.

Notes:

  • 'The Matthew Effect', "For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance. But from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath." This has an impact on success, where those who have talent get more opportunities, play with better players, etc, leading to them getting even better than someone with less talent who starts in a lesser position, and as a result, never gets the improvements from these things.

  • An interesting example of the Matthew effect is that most successful athletes were born in the month after the age-group cut-off that existed at youth level. This meant they were usually the more developed player physically and mentally, which meant they were more likely to have the advantages of being encouraged, being enrolled in elite athlete programs, etc.

  • It was found that mastery in most areas came as a result of 10,000 hours of practising. Often, however, those 10,000 hours came as a result of the unique circumstances that that person found themselves in. e.g. Bill Gates had a lot of opportunities to work with computers growing up, partially because he showed interest and skill in that area, and partly because of where he grew up, the people he knew etc.

  • I.Q. is useful as a predictor of success but only up to a threshold. It can be seen more as a predictor of lack of success than success.

  • Something else (lateral thinking, creativity etc) is required after that threshold.

  • Another element that contributes to success is social skills, and unlike I.Q. these can be taught. These are generally affected by one's upbringing, and how they were or weren't encouraged to engage socially.

  • Success can also be majorly affected by what culture and stage of the economy one has been born into. e.g. Adversity from being a Jew, as well as lessons learnt through coming up in Jewish culture may be a contributor to the fact that Jewish people tend to be high earners. e.g. Being born at a time when birth rates are down means more opportunity in the job market etc.

  • One's place of origin also falls into this category, and more specifically the historical attitudes passed on as a result can have major effects. e.g. A pilot from a place that highly values politeness might not give sufficiently alarming signals to an air traffic controller from a place that doesn't have the same level of politeness, resulting in communication errors. e.g. Rather than thinking Asians are naturally better at maths, maybe it's just because they're from a culture of hard work (Rice paddies), and that maths can be improved by hard work. e.g. Kids from poorer backgrounds experience decreases in educational scores over the summer whereas those from higher-income families do not.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Blink - Malcolm Gladwell

September 22, 2021 Conor O'Neill

Blink - Malcolm Gladwell

3-Sentence Summary:

Experience gives us the gift of acting quickly and intuitively, and this should be used when appropriate, in circumstances where we have deliberately trained or have a lot of experience, for example.

However, we should also be on the lookout for when a more deliberate and thoughtful approach would be better, such as when we have the benefit of time, a specific desired outcome, and a system in place for decision-making.

More information isn't always better, and can in fact be detrimental at times e.g. It is often more informative to look at someone’s actions, facial expressions, or body language than to ask their direct opinion.

Notes:

  • 'Thin-slicing" is when we take a narrow slice of experience and use our unconscious to find a pattern that indicates something about the whole situation. e.g. Gottman (psychologist) using videotapes of couples talking and examining features of the conversation to predict their divorce probability. e.g. Strangers looking at someone's bedroom were able to predict their personality traits better than their friends were. e.g. People were able to predict a doctor's probability of being sued by examining the doctor's tone of voice during interactions with patients.

  • We don't have access to the information behind why we make snap decisions/judgements, but we often tell a story about them afterwards.

  • 'Priming' uses subtle hints to push your decisions in a certain direction without you knowing it. e.g. Hearing polite words makes you more polite. e.g. Hearing words associated with old people makes you walk more slowly.

  • Is the real you who you say you are when you answer questions about yourself? Or is it revealed through your actions?

  • We have our conscious attitudes towards things but also implicit associations. e.g. people are paid $500 extra per year per inch of height.

  • Consistent exposure to counter-evidence is a way of decreasing these biases.

  • We presume that more information is better for making decisions, but while it increases our confidence in our decisions, it often makes them worse, not to mention more time-intensive.

  • We should find the balance between using instinctual judgement when it is effective, and deliberate thinking (which is effective when you have the benefit of time, a clearly defined task, and preferably the help of a computer).

  • Asking someone's opinion directly is often less informative than looking at their behaviour, body language, or facial expressions.

  • Taste tests often fail because they're removed from the context in which the food/drink is enjoyed. e.g. One sip of Pepsi might taste better than coke, but a whole can might not.

  • Often we think we don't like something when we simply aren't used to it.

  • With training and expertise, we can become better at seeing behind the snap judgements as to whether we like something or not. e.g. Food tasters.

  • Facial expressions are rich with information, which is why babies are hard-wired to seek out faces. Autistic people tend to do have this, and this aligns with the idea around autistic people not having a theory of mind (the ability to recognise that other people have thoughts different to theirs).

  • Being overly aroused leaves us mind-blind (temporarily autistic?), as does lack of time. This plays a big part in police shootings, for example, where mistakes are often made, at the risk of life in many cases.

  • Training and experience can allow you to extract information from the thinnest of slices, as if time were slowed down.

  • Experience gives us the gift of acting quickly and intuitively, but this gift can be easily disrupted.

  • This should make us empathetic to others in circumstances where decision-making is impaired.

  • More information isn't always better, and can in fact be detrimental at times.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

The Tipping Point - Malcolm Gladwell

September 15, 2021 Conor O'Neill
IMG_20210831_132129.jpeg

The Tipping Point - Malcolm Gladwell

3-Sentence Summary:

It is useful to think of things like emerging fashion trends, crimes waves, bestselling book phenomenons, increases in types behaviours, and various other societal changes as epidemics, which have a tipping point, at which everything starts to spread at an exponential rate.

These epidemics and their tipping points rely on ‘The Law of the Few’ (Connectors, Mavens, and Salesmen spreading the message), ‘The Stickiness Factor’ (how memorable and appealing the message is), and ‘The Power of Context (The times and places in which the epidemics occur).

We can use the knowledge of these elements in our pursuit of creating social epidemics with our ideas, innovations, important information, businesses, etc, but also in intervening in those epidemics that we don't want to spread.

Notes:

  • It is useful to think of things like emerging fashion trends, crimes waves, bestselling book phenomenons, increases in types behaviours, and various other societal changes as epidemics. Ideas and behaviours spread just like viruses do.

  • Epidemics generally do not happen at a gradual linear rate. Instead, they tend to simmer beneath the surface until a certain 'tipping point', a dramatic moment when everything changes.

  • Epidemics often happen naturally, but there are things we can do to purposely try to create them.

  • There are 3 rules that lead to the tipping point: The Law of the Few, The Stickiness Factor, and The Power of Context.

  • 'The Law of the Few' - There are a small number of people who are responsible for most of the change when it comes to bringing an epidemic to its tipping point. These people can be separated into Connectors, Mavens, and Salesmen.

    • Connectors are those people who have a huge number of social connections. By virtue of the number of people they know from various backgrounds, they act as a link from us to many other people, which is advantageous for spreading new information and ideas, since those who we are already connected to are more likely to share the same information and ideas as us already. Word-of-mouth epidemics rely on Connectors.

    • Mavens are those who accumulate information about specific topics. They create the message that connectors then go and spread.

    • The third group, Salesmen, possess the skills to persuade those who are up until now unconvinced. These skills can be learnt, but often come naturally to a small select few people, and are often extremely subtle.

  • 'The Stickiness Factor' refers to how the information is delivered, how memorable it is, and whether, as a result, people spread it, act on it, think about it, or not. This is generally a result of subconscious factors.

  • In order to make an idea 'sticky', tinkering and observation of how people react is required. This is done with children's TV shows, for example, such as Sesame Street, where they purposely change elements of the show, observed how children watch the show, and adapt the future features of the show as a result.

  • 'The Power of Context' - Epidemics are sensitive to the conditions and circumstances of the times and places in which they occur. E.g. A town with broken windows is more likely to have more windows broken in the future, but also likely to have more crime, as a result of the message that acceptance of broken windows gives. In this case, the environment is responsible for the epidemic of crime, rather than people.

  • Another example is Zimbardo's prison experiment, where people were assigned to pretend to be either prisoners or guards. After a few days, the people who were assigned as guards found themselves behaving in cruel ways that they could never have imagined.

  • Other examples include various fashion trends, the increase in smoking, the spread of diseases like Syphilis, and suicide in various cultures.

  • We can use the knowledge of these elements in our pursuit of creating social epidemics with our ideas, innovations, important information, businesses, etc, but also in intervening in those epidemics that we don't want to spread.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Beyond Order - Jordan B. Peterson

September 8, 2021 Conor O'Neill
IMAGE 2021-03-16 13:53:08.jpg

Beyond Order - Jordan B. Peterson

3-Sentence Summary:

Life contains elements that are characterised by malevolence and suffering on one side, potentially leaving us resentful and nihilistic, and beauty, joy, and love on the other side, serving as a potential antidote.

There is another balance between appreciating the institutions and achievements of the past (bringing forward what is useful), and progress (updating the world to what is currently needed).

As an individual, you can choose to become resentful and nihilistic in your view of the world (whether that is about things that happened in the past or the worries for the future), or you can have the courage to take on responsibility for the betterment of the things that are within your control, in spite of the knowledge that you’ll fall short, using the wisdom of the past and having faith that the future can be better.

Notes:

  • "Do not carelessly denigrate social institutions or creative achievement."

  • We outsource the problem of sanity, meaning that we don't merely remain mentally healthy as a result of our own mental capacity, but also because we are constantly being kept in line with how to think, act, and speak by those around us (the social world).

  • Not only is the individual moulded by the social world, but the social world is also simultaneously shaped by the requirements of the individual.

  • This makes denigrating long-lasting social institutions dangerous, since they were formed iteratively based on what has worked for the individuals.

  • Competency hierarchies can be examples of this. They have been developed to put those who are best at solving the specific problems in the position to do so, benefitting the rest of the society.

  • For the individual, the aim shouldn't be to simply get to the top of the hierarchy (winning that one game) but to do so with others in mind (therefore being invited back to play, and probably win, more games). There is an emergent ethic that comes out of that, to aim at the best for you, but also the people around you.

  • Taking your place at the bottom of a hierarchy can be useful in that it develops gratitude (that there are those above you solving problems) and humility (about not knowing as much as you could know).

  • Being an equal among peers (say in the middle of a hierarchy, but presumably at any level) allows for the exchange of information more freely than upwards or downwards.

  • If the hierarchy is working well, and the problem is real, those with the most competence should rise to the top, and with a certain relief from others, since the problem has the best chance of getting solved, improving life for everyone.

  • Sometimes, however, these hierarchies, and social institutions more generally, can become overly restrictive and resistant to necessary change.

  • This balance between conserving those things that work well and those things that need to be progressed, changed, or updated plays out in the political sphere, with conservatives on one side, and progressives on the other. These two are linked to personality.

  • The meta-rule here can be seen in hero myths, like Harry Potter, where one should follow the rules, unless the rules need to be broken - if following those same rules would undermine the underlying moral underpinnings of the rules.

  • "Imagine who you could be and then aim single-mindedly at that."

  • The question of who you should be and how you live your life has been an important question for thousands of years.

  • In order to answer this, we can turn to the stories that have captivated people for thousands of years. If we assume that the purpose of memory is learning for better coping with future situations, and that those things that would be remembered have passed many tests of usefulness, we can assume that there is something to be learned for us as a human. The stories that have lasted the test of time include to a large extent 'hero myths' where the hero sets out on a journey, faces trial and tribulations, goes through them, and comes back to his tribe with the wisdom picked up along the way.

  • These stories abstracted become religious stories.

  • We can also look to those things that spontaneously appear interesting to us as individuals. What is a better thing to pursue than something that we feel compelled to? Perhaps that is a hint towards our own hero's journey.

  • Perhaps in this pursuit, we will find a story that is meaningful and productive and become the hero of that story.

  • "Do not hide unwanted things in the fog."

  • What you do every day repeats and accumulates over time. If it happens every day, it is really worth changing if you don't like it, even if it's small.

  • We sometimes won't make our goals clear because making clear goals defines the metric for what failure looks like. We may think not defining failure means we'll never fail, but we then don't have goals, and without goals, we don't have positive emotion, since positive emotion is, at least in part, for moving us towards our goals. No goals = purposelessness.

  • If we want our life to be better, we should admit how we feel. That way, we can clarify it, but also get others opinions on it. Better yet, we may even get what we want!

  • We should also get clear on our past. The function of our memory is to take lessons from it, so getting clear on our story about the past can allow us to repeat more of what is good and less of what is bad.

  • "Notice that opportunity lurks where responsibility has been abdicated."

  • If you want to be invaluable, in a workplace for example, do the useful things that no one else is doing.

  • We experience meaning as a result of moving towards a worthwhile goal. This required the acceptance of responsibility. The more responsibility you take on, the more meaning you will experience.

  • "Do not do what you hate."

  • When we are being asked to do something that we deem as immoral, we have a duty to articulate it, albeit in a practical way, before our ability to do so is taken away, and it often is when we wait too long to say something.

  • "Abandon ideology."

  • With a decline in the popularity of traditional religions, we are left without a structure that was previously there to guide people with how to live.

  • Ideology has a tendency to replace that, where someone takes one aspect of the world as defining characteristic and aims to explain everything through it. Inevitably, this often ends in disaster (e.g. communism).

  • Instead, we should take the more humble approach of acting out our values in our own life, fixing those things within our reach, whilst crucially taking responsibility for the outcomes.

  • "Work as hard as you possibly can on at least one thing and see what happens."

  • The world is extremely complex and there are almost infinite numbers of things we could pay attention to. Having clear goals simplifies the world, reducing uncertainty and anxiety.

  • Even if these goals aren't exactly reflective of your ideal outcome, they will be far preferable to no goals. "If you aim at nothing, you become plagued by everything."

  • One piece of advice would be to choose the best path currently available, even if it is far from ideal.

  • This concept is reflected in the proper development of children, where the ability to learn how to play specific games with others (in spite of, perhaps, their desire to do what they individually want) teaches them that there is more joy to be had when there are some constraints. Good parenting will provide some constraints for this reason, rather than the common idea that this is quelling their creativity, for example. Chaos in the alternative.

  • It is also seen in work, where the apprentice must first follow the established rules or even dogma, before becoming a master, where they no longer have to be a servant of dogma. The initial constraints, and the learnings that come as a result, are a requirement to reaching mastery.

  • "Try to make one room in your home as beautiful as possible."

  • Beauty reminds you of that which is immune to cynicism.

  • The job of an artist is to remind us of that beauty.

  • We can also experience that through experiencing everyday life with children.

  • We can establish a relationship with beauty in many ways but one easy way is to make a room in your home as beautiful as you can.

  • "If old memories still upset you, write them down carefully and completely."

  • Old memories that still upset you, make you feel anger, or make you feel scared are protective, the aim being to keep you from repeating them.

  • However, if we are able to clearly extract the lesson that is to be learned from that experience, we will be clearer on what part is to be avoiding, or will have a clear idea of where we need to improve in order to stop it from happening again. With that, rather than being emotionally controlled by the experience, we can take control of it.

  • A key to doing this is to get extremely clear on what happened and why you feel the way you do. Writing it out or talking it out can help a lot. Hence the advice of journaling as well as therapy.

  • "Plan and work diligently to maintain the romance in your relationship."

  • In order to get what is best from a relationship, it is important to articulate what you actually want, and listen to what the other person wants. For that reason, it is advisable to schedule in at least 90 minutes of time with your partner to talk about each others' individual experiences. This also means the other person won't be left having to guess (and probably be wrong) about what you actually want from them.

  • This can be difficult, since, by being honest with your desires, you simultaneously give the other person the ability to help fulfil the desires, but you also give the other person potential ammunition to hurt or embarrass you. For that reason, trust is extremely important in a relationship.

  • The importance of long-term commitment is also important here. You're more likely to trust someone with what you want if you are confident that they will stick with you regardless and work these things through with you. This is one of the benefits of the concept of marriage, which makes it harder to separate from someone and gives you a chance to express your intentions to stay with them for life.

  • Creating this relationship isn't just about getting what you want from the relationship. It's also about providing a solid base to start a family, to allow you to pursue a career, and perhaps even spend some time focusing on your own leisure.

  • Setting up roles within the relationship is important too. Traditional roles can be useful as a starting point, but even if not strictly adhered to, getting clear on what is deemed fair by both parties will allow you to hold up your side of the bargain and be happy about it.

  • Do not ever punish your partner for doing something that you want them to do, particularly if it took them a lot of effort. The likelihood of them doing it again diminishes rapidly if you do.

  • "Do not allow yourself to become resentful, deceitful, or arrogant."

  • We tend to think of our lives in terms of a story, with a starting point and a destination in the future, along with perceived difficulties and ways of overcoming those along the way.

  • It's instinctual, and if you want to teach a child something, you should do so in terms of a story.

  • To coddle children is to make them weak since there is a natural adaptive process that comes with difficulty.

  • Our political outlook is dependent in large part on our inborn temperament, but since both sides have their points in given situations, it is important to listen to those who are natural antagonists to us in the temperament.

  • Resentment can come as a result of the harsh fact that nature in some ways conspires against us. The antidote is to confront that head-on and become stronger as a result since any other alternative leaves you as a victim to nature.

  • The lair is arrogant enough to believe that he is smarter than everyone else, and that he can manipulate the world to suit his desires. However, this places him at a disadvantage, since his orientation in the world (particularly if he lies to himself) is not the real world, and his in-built assumptions are therefore faulty from the start.

  • "Be grateful in spite of your suffering."

  • Knowing that there is malevolence and suffering in the world, you have choices around how to act. You can become resentful, or you can choose to work towards the betterment of the negative aspects you see in the world.

  • Confronting the negativity in the world gives you something to aim away from, and thinking about the potential malevolence in yourself and others allows you to understand it better, and therefore deal with it better when it inevitably comes your way.

  • Inevitably, the choice of whether to succumb to the temptations of nihilism and selfishness comes down to the courage to chose to work for the good of the world, in spite of the badness and potential pointlessness.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

12 Rules for Life - Jordan B. Peterson

September 1, 2021 Conor O'Neill
IMAGE 2021-03-16 13:51:03.jpg

12 Rules for Life - Jordan B. Peterson

3-Sentence Summary:

Meaning is found in walking the line between order (predictability - when things are going as we'd expect) and chaos (unpredictability - when the future of what's happening now is unclear).

Achieving this involves pushing ourselves towards the highest good that we can imagine, which can be discovered through ancient texts and history, as well as observation of our own conscience.

This requires that we take full responsibility for our own actions, focus on improving them, delay gratification, aiming at the best possible future for ourselves and those around us, whilst focussing on the present moment at each stage along the way.

Notes:

  • "Stand up straight with your shoulders back"

  • Lobsters, a species that has been around for 350 million years (even before dinosaurs), are organised in hierarchies, built at least in part on one lobster's ability to inflict damage to another.

  • This is established incrementally, based on size, then chemicals shot from one lobster to another (presumably indicative of their fitness/health), their ability to put one another on their backs, and then their ability to harm or kill the other. Dominance can be determined at any of these stages and may not need to be progressed to the next stage.

  • This is to say that the idea of hierarchies is not a human invention, and certainly not a modern one.

  • In lobsters, one's perception of their place in the hierarchy is proportional to the amount of serotonin they produce to the point where lobsters exposed to serotonin after a defeat will revert to the posture of readiness to fight again, in spite of the fact that they'd usually curl up and scurry away.

  • In lobsters and humans, serotonin levels are a correlate for confidence, where low serotonin means decreased confidence, more response to stress and costlier physical preparedness for emergency.

  • Another harsh reality (again, not a modern or particularly human one) is that of Price's law, or the Matthew Principle, or the Pareto Principle, where those who have more will be given more, and those who have less will have it taken away, leaving a small percentage at the top with most of the goods. They have more freedom to take risks and reap the rewards, they are in less threat because they have to fight less for resources, and females find the males in the hierarchy more attractive.

  • This certainty can, however, be thrown off by health and lifestyle factors.

  • There is also the issue of negative feedback loops, where low status leads to decreasing status. For example, someone who is depressed will be less likely to do the things that might alleviate some of the depression (Improving lifestyle, socialising etc), leading to more depression.

  • In order to get out of this, we can make use of positive feedback loops, perhaps starting by embodying some of the higher status individual's traits. For example, by standing up straight, integrating some of that your darker feelings (e.g. resentment) to the point where you will stand up for yourself, and by facing your problems head on.

  • "Treat yourself like you are someone you are responsible for helping"

  • People are less likely to take their own medication consistently than they are to ensure their pet takes their pet's medication consistently. Do people care more about their pet's well-being than their own?

  • Perhaps it is because we see ourselves as having some autonomy and free will over our choices (including those that make things worse). This is exemplifies in the story of Adam and Eve, where they are told about the downsides of their newfound self-consciousness.

  • Our experience of the world can be viewed as balancing order (what it's like when things are going as expected, where you're in control, and things are predictable, but in excess can be rigid), and chaos (where things are unpredictable, which can be exciting a lead to new positive things, but can also mean the revelation of new problems), and where meaning can be found where neither order or chaos is lacking or excessive.

  • Perhaps aiming for that (rather than 'happiness') is something that would allow you to respect yourself, and treat yourself better as a result.

  • "Make friends with people who want the best for you"

  • Beware of helping people who do not want to be helped, and instead, choose to spend your time with people who also want things to be better, not worse, unless of course, you also want things to be worse.

  • "Compare yourself with who you were yesterday, not with who someone else is today"

  • In any singular activity, you can compare yourself to others, and generally, there will be people who are worse and people who are better.

  • However, we are not only playing one game. In fact, we are all playing multiple games, which mean you're a father, a husband, an accountant, a football player, along with the other roles you play, to the point where your combination of games forms a unique game that only you are playing.

  • Therefore, to compare one element of that one element of another person's 'game' can give an inaccurate perspective, and in reality, it is impossible to do a true comparison.

  • Because what we see if affected by what our aim is (See this video), we should be careful with what we aim at.

  • We should aim at the highest good that we possibly can, whatever that means to us (even if it means starting small and bargaining with ourselves at first), rather than aiming at a being better at one thing than someone else is at one thing.

  • In order to do this, we need to have an idea of what is 'good'. We can look to religion and history for ideas put forward by our ancestors, and we can also start to examine our own conscious or taste. What actions are we doing that we know we shouldn't? What activities feel meaningful? What do we resent? What do we love?

  • "Do not let your children do anything that makes you dislike them"

  • It is important that parents socialise their children in such a ways that increase the chance that people they're going to be interacting with in the future like them.

  • This is partially because the children they'll be interacting with around age 3-4 when they start making friends will then become the agents of that socialisation, and if those children don't want them around, they're not going to experience that socialisation, and the subsequent becoming part of society.

  • Another reason is that if you don't socialise them (i.e. aim to push their behaviour in one direction over another), then you increase the chances that you will resent them, and take that resentment out on them or someone else, in a way that will be less in your control.

  • Children will spontaneously act in ways that parents deem unacceptable, as they try to make sense of the world and find their limitations. They will also spontaneously act in ways that the parent would like to see replicated.

  • 'Catching' them doing something good and rewarding it will increase the chances that it will be replicated, and punishing them effectively when they do something 'bad' will decrease the chances of them replicating it.

  • Parents should act as proxies for the real world that their children will grow up in.

  • "Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world"

  • Given the suffering that exists, it is no surprise that people often feel hard-done-by, even sometimes to the extent that they'll seek vengeance on the world at large, sometimes resulting in genocide when taken to the extreme.

  • But there are other options, as shown by the many people who have come through tough times (perhaps tougher than you or I have), without complete resentment for existence. e.g. Aleksandr Solzenitzen.

  • We usually don't have enough control to go out a change the world, but we have some control over our own actions, and perhaps if we start to move those in the right direction, or at least stop doing the things we know to be wrong, we might be better equipped to then help our family and friends, and maybe then our community and maybe then the wider society.

  • "Pursue what is meaningful (not what is expedient)"

  • It can be easy to question the meaning of most elements of reality, but one things that is difficult to deny the existence of is suffering. So what can we do about it?

  • We could maximise our pleasure in the moment, but often this will result in long-term downsides. e.g. drinking will be pleasurable in the moment, but lead to a hangover and ill-health.

  • We should take into account both now and the future, which will inevitably means sacrificing something (at least in potential) in the present for an expected return down the line.

  • Ancient wisdom shows instances of this where sacrifices were made in action without much understanding around how that would affect the outcome (sacrificing a lamb for God's blessing), but the idea was still there.

  • This also manifested in the instance of excess food, for example, where giving some away now could mean that person might return the favour when they have enough and you don't.

  • So what sacrifice should we make? Perhaps we can assume that if we are not getting the outcomes that we want, then the sacrifices aren't correct or enough.

  • Meaning is found where the sacrifices you're making are creating sufficient order and warding off excessive chaos, keeping one foot in each, as opposed to expedience which isn't meaningful.

  • "Tell the truth — or, at least, don’t lie"

  • In order to navigate the world properly, having an accurate (as possible) picture of what is going on is advantageous. When we lie, we distort that view of reality, and more than that, we encourage self-distrust in our ability to accurately assess what's going on.

  • Small lies often turn into bigger lies, as the small lies require more lies to back them up.

  • "Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don’t"

  • There are various types of conversations, each with different goals.

  • One is a conversation about the past, as part of therapy for example, where the aim is to distil the information, ensure you have it correct, and taking the useful information into informing future decisions. That is the purpose of memory.

  • Another type of conversation is with yourself - thinking - where you create 2 or more different viewpoints, and allow them to battle out ideas in your head, as a means to seeing what you think is best.

  • If this is difficult, you can discuss these ideas with someone else, not only in order to hear their viewpoint, but also to see how they react to yours. Generally, if your ideas seem to be veering from the norm, it's worth considering that you might be wrong, so be sure that you've though your opinion through thoroughly.

  • When listening to someone, it can be useful to summarise their viewpoint, repeat it back to them, asking for confirmation that it is an accurate depiction of their viewpoint. This can give them a more consolidated version of their ideas, but also forces you to understand them better, ensuring your reacting to their actual opinion, whether in agreement or disagreement.

  • Their are also more dysfunctional conversations, where each person is simply waiting for their turn to speak, so that they can assert why they're right, or assert their dominance.

  • We outsource some of our sanity to society. By only relying on our own interpretation of the world, we can get lost in that, so seeing other react to our opinions and actions acts as another form of feedback.

  • A lecture is another form of conversation, and although it may seem like a one-way conversation, it is useful for the lecturer to speak as if to each individual, as well as being observant of their reactions.

  • Another type of conversations is that of "active philosophy", where 2 people of good-will are trying to explore ideas, with the aim of finding a better way of acting in the world.

  • "Be precise in your speech"

  • We see things in the world as they are useful to us. e.g. We don't see the atomic structure of a chair. We see it as something to sit on.

  • This is affected by our goals, both short-term and long-term. e.g. If our goal is to reach something on the top shelf, that same chair may become something to stand on, rather than sit on.

  • Given how much of what we see in the world is affected by our goals, it is important that we have a clear idea of those goals, and that we have them properly aligned. Otherwise, there is too much chaos, and we don't know how to act.

  • Putting these goals/aims/objectives into words makes them more concrete, as well as communicable to others, allowing them to be subject to feedback and refinement.

  • Because our goals are necessarily intertwined with others' (not least those of your spouse, family and friends), and that those goals will often be in conflict, it is important to have conversations, often difficult ones, so that you can align your goals. Having these conversations early and often helps avoid them growing into unsolvable problems.

  • "Do not bother children when they are skate-boarding"

  • As humans, we seek out an optimal level of danger/chaos, a level where we're confident in our abilities, but still pushing for improvement. By creating a world where there is no danger, we limit our ability for growth.

  • Seeing the human race as a plague to the earth or similar often leads to self-destruction, or if taken to the extreme, societally destructive outcomes, as evidenced by the columbine shooters, for example.

  • The downsides of hierarchy are often emphasised, without acknowledgement of the necessity, inevitability, and advantages of hierarchical structures. This often results in disastrous attempts to demolish hierarchy and in pursuit of complete equality. Historically, this has led to dier unintended consequences, including millions of deaths.

  • One example of misunderstanding around this is the differences in incomes and positions in companies between men and women. It is often seen through the reductionist lens of being caused by unjust use of power or discrimination, ignoring the role of women's choices to (understandably) chose improved family life and enjoyment.

  • Women tend to choose mates that are above equal to or above them in the their position in the hierarchy, and men are the opposite (although they tend to choose younger mates). This creates a scenario where men compete with each other, and women select from the results of that competition.

  • Men and women differ in personality traits. Women tend to be less assertive, and can often benefit from assertiveness training to ensure they're not getting taken advantage of. It is important for men to be able to manage their propensity for hierarchy competition, by being able to take things lightly at times, and put up with the teasing and joking that can be characteristic of male-to-male interactions.

  • "Pet a cat when you encounter one on the street"

  • The inevitable suffering of life can make it tempting to wallow in self-pity and disgust for the injustice. In this case, thinking doesn't help. There will always be bad things to think about. What can help is to notice the positive things when they present themselves, shortening your time horizon to the present, whilst your sights on the hopeful future.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Skin in the Game - Nassim Nicholas Taleb

August 25, 2021 Conor O'Neill
2020-07-31 01.53.42 1.jpg

Skin in the Game - Nassim Nicholas Taleb

3-Sentence Summary:

Having Skin in the Game (SITG) means being venerable to the consequences of your actions and what you say.

It is essential for good decision making (keeps overconfidence in check), learning (you get feedback in real-time), and giving/receiving advice (don’t give advice when you won’t feel the potential downside, and don’t take advice from someone who won’t feel the potential downside).

We should use this as a filtering mechanism for both making our own decisions (put skin in the game), and for assessing the actions of others (do they have skin in the game?).

Notes:

  • Having Skin in the Game (SITG) means being venerable to the consequences of your actions and what you say.

  • Having SITG is essential for good decision making (keeps overconfidence in check), learning ( you get feedback in real-time), and advising (don’t take advice from someone who won’t feel the potential downside).

  • “Treat others as you would like to be treated.” is 100s of years old (Golden rule). Better yet is the Silver Rule: “Don’t treat others as you would not like to be treated.” as it is easier to identify specific ways in which you would not like to be treated.

  • Without SITG, things get overly complicated (people are incentivised to sound smart as opposed to getting the job done), things get dull (no immediate feedback and therefore no short-term feeling of satisfaction or dopamine hits, which are needed to keep us going), and things miss out on being subjected to the corrective/evolutionary or eliminative process of time.

  • Employees have little SITG (trade freedom for security). Entrepreneurs have skin in the game. Even more than that, Artisans (people who won’t compromise their creative endeavours for money, no matter what) have Soul in the Game. If you can’t have soul in the game, you’re in the wrong game.

  • Ethics are more important than laws. Ethics are more likely to diverge to laws than the other way around. We have our own SITG with ethics, as opposed to giving agency to the government.

  • We can have collective SITG within a sufficiently small group (e.g. Family = I have your back. Your wins/losses are also mine). These groups can have collective SITG with other groups (town, country, etc.) but individuals can’t have collective SITG if the group is too big (the whole world). For that reason, we should expect poorer decisions when making choices that affect too big of a group. Decisions should be made at a more local level where possible.

  • In complex systems, groups act differently than you would expect based on the behaviour of individuals. The interactions are more important than the individual act, and are more predictable.

  • E.g. “The Minority Rule”. It only takes a small number of sufficiently adamant individuals for the group to have to change its behaviour, especially if the cost to the group is small. By looking at the individuals in the group, you’d probably say that isn’t the opinion of most of the individuals. Yet, the change occurs.

  • E.g. Most food in the USA is Koscher, in spite of only a small number of people wanting that, because the fact that it’s Koscher means very little negative to most people, but a lot of positive to an adamant few.

  • Systems can work well even with unintelligent individuals.

  • Action without talk is better than talk without action.

  • An I.Y.I. - Intellectual Yet Idiot - has a merely theoretical view of the world, thinking they know what is best for everyone, and that everyone who disagrees is simply uneducated. They have little hands-on experience or skin in the game. They think they know more than they do.

  • We generally don’t mind people who are rich and famous, as long as they took risk (had SITG) to get there, and did so on merit. It’s those who seemed to get there by luck that we don’t like. If we allow markets to operate freely, these people will be taken down over time and replaced.

  • Lindy effect: If something has lasted 50 years, it’s likely to last 50 more (excluding perishables like food and individual human beings). Ideas, books, laws, theories, technologies etc will have SITG and time will be their judge, and those that survive should be seen as robust.

  • All else equal, those who don’t have the usual characteristics for a given role, but got to the same level as those who do, are likely to be better, since they had to get there in spite of being different.

  • If it looks like “science” (or art, business (business plans), literature (fancy words) etc) it is probably not a good version of it. It is taking no risks and doesn’t have SITG.

  • Threats should have SITG. Verbal threats are weak.

  • Focus on the end consumer, not your fellow professionals, or your feedback mechanism will be in the wrong place (skin in the wrong game).

  • If your private life doesn’t back up what you say, what you say gets cancelled out, not your private life.

  • Virtue is doing something for the collective without needing credit, or better yet, if it is virtuous and unpopular, because your reputation is on the line.

  • Your beliefs are not what you say you believe. They’re what you act out and are willing to put SITG for.

  • Religions/beliefs are Lindy-effect-proof, and have likely lasted because they’re useful for survival, even if we can’t say exactly why.

  • Ultimately, rationality is defined by that which is good for survival.

  • If complete ruin is a viable option, cost-benefit analyses are far less useful, and the rational thing is to avoid ruin. I.e. Don’t play Russian Roulette.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Antifragile - Nassim Nicholas Taleb

August 18, 2021 Conor O'Neill
IMG_20210709_114016.jpg

3-Sentence Summary:

Antifragility is the previously unnamed (and therefore somewhat less visible) idea that describes the opposite of fragility, where fragility refers to things that suffer in the presence of chaos, robustness refers to things that remain unaffected by chaos, and antifragility refers to things that benefit from chaos.

Things that are fragile tend to be more exposed to the negative aspects of unexpected events (a.k.a. Black Swans) in spite of the fact that they often appear less volatile up to that point (like a turkey leading up to Christmas), as opposed to those things that whilst volatile, are adaptable in times of uncertainty (like a Taxi Driver whose income is up and down on a daily basis, but whose job remains stable over time, without him carrying a risk of being fired).

Things that tend to be more organic tend to be more antifragile (compared to things that are non-organic/mechanical/man-made/constrained) since they have the capacity to adapt to and learn from stressors and volatility.

Notes:

  • Antifragility is the previously unnamed (and therefore somewhat less visible) idea that describes the opposite of fragility.

  • Fragility refers to things that suffer in the presence of chaos, and robust things remain unaffected by chaos. Antifragility refers to things that benefit from chaos.

  • Domain-dependence refers to our propensity to notice a concept in one domain but forget it in another domain.

  • The effect of antifragility occurs via overcompensation - When we lift weights, the body adapts by being getting stronger, above and beyond being able to lift that same weight. The same applies to drug tolerance.

  • This can be seen as redundancy - Nature likes to over-insure itself.

  • Lucretius problem refers to believing the tallest mountain we've seen is the tallest mountain there is. Always assume that worse could happen!

  • Some jobs can be fragile to criticism, but others are antifragile to the point where criticism is beneficial. e.g. banned books become popular, and rock stars become more famous for doing crazy things.

  • There are 2 categories - Organic (complex), which tend to be antifragile, preferring acute stressors with recovery over chronic stressors, and non-organic (mechanical/non-complex) which degrade over time without a mechanism for self-healing and strengthening.

  • Antifragility of the group often comes at the expense of fragility to individual elements that make up the group. e.g. evolution requires randomness and mutations (often negative) in individuals, but also produces positive mutations that get passed on and improve the species overall. e.g. Entrepreneurs (individuals) can be fragile, but the group benefits from their failures (as well as successes).

  • More variability does not necessarily mean more risk. Small regular ups and downs (e.g. entrepreneurs) show volatility but allow for learning (hence antifragility), but manmade smoothing of volatility can create less volatility short-term, but fragility to black swans (extreme, unexpected events) such as getting fired (employees).

  • The turkey problem - Based on previous information (getting fed and looked after each day), the turkey thinks he's safe, until one day a week before Christmas, when he experiences a black swan (is killed) - Don't think that just because things have been good, they will remain that way, particularly if they've been extremely constrained.

  • Things that don't experience randomness become fragile, through not being exposed to the necessity of corrections and learning, whilst showing no outward risks - stopping small forest fires increases the chance of bigger ones.

  • Artificially constrained systems become prone to black swans.

  • Naive interventionism - intervening when doing nothing would have been a better idea.

  • When considering an intervention, we should not only consider the probabilistic benefits but also the probabilistic downsides.

  • Iatrogenics - the harms done by a treatment (such as a medical treatment) which is often overlooked because some people see benefits, even though the harms can often be larger. This is against the Hippocratic oath. Every time there is intervention, there are iatrogenics.

  • Interventions in the business cycle lead to fragility, in that companies aren't allowed to fail early (and try again) and minimise long-term damage to the system.

  • Interventions aren't always bad. Limiting size, speed, and concentration (since these things have disproportionate effects) can reduce Black Swans. e.g. Road speed limits.

  • Procrastination can be protective, stopping unnecessary action when no action would have been better.

  • Access to data increases intervention. e.g. Michael Jackson's doctor checked his health often, leading to many interventions to things that might have worked out ok by themselves.

  • Receiving information less frequently allows for cancellation of some of the noise. e.g. not reading the news every day, but reading it each month. You'll only get what stood out.

  • Prediction is not necessarily bad, but you don't want it to expose you to excessive risk. The risks are in the iatrogenics.

  • You don't have to predict when the black swan will occur, but you should predict that there will be one, and create antifragility (or at least robustness) to it.

  • We should separate black swans into separate categories: Those that are unpredictable and consequential, and those that aren't of serious concern due to being predictable and/or inconsequential.

  • You can't predict in general, but you can predict that those who predict will be more likely to experience trouble, as a result of prediction errors.

  • Having an 'indifference to fate' positive or negative makes one robust as it helps avoid the issue of being afraid to lose what you have.

  • However, if you're able to eliminate the downside, either by insuring against losses, or, like Seneca, reframing losses as unimportant, whilst keeping the upside by enjoying the upsides (one-way bookkeeping), you become antifragile.

  • That way, volatility will give you exposure to positives and not negatives.

  • The Barbell Strategy involves extreme conservatism on one side (removing risk of extreme downside) and extreme risk on the other (exposing yourself to positive black swans). e.g. most of your investments in index funds, and a tiny amount in risky investments. e.g. Work a boring day job, write books in your spare time. e.g. Study the minimum needed to get the required mark on the exam, and base the rest of your reading on your interests, quitting books when you're bored.

  • An example of asymmetry is options/optionality, a contract where one retains the choice to take the upside and disregard the potential downside, this may come at a price but if there are potential extreme gains, it could be worth it.

  • Technologies aren't invented and then used. Instead, randomness feeds us discoveries and the intelligence comes in our ability to recognise the useful from the useless - identifying the option.

  • Tinkering - trial and error - can expose you to this randomness, where even the error can be useful info.

  • The narrative and reality of something are not always aligned, and conflation is common (this is known as an epiphenomenon). e.g. education level of a country leads to wealth, when the reality is that it's the other way around.

  • We should be sceptical of narratives and instead favour what happens in practice and what has come organically rather than what's being imposed top-down.

  • It is commonly thought that academics come up with theories that are then put into practice. In fact, it is the theories that come from the practice, and an overreliance on the current theories can then lead to mistakes, since these theories can often be less effective than (and behind) what the practitioners are already doing.

  • Just because you don't understand something about the way things have been done for years, doesn't mean they're stupid (traditions etc). In fact, in many cases, it is better to understand the outcomes and magnitudes of those outcomes rather than the true/false nature of a thing.

  • The average value of something isn't always the best indicator, and often the variability about the average is more important. e.g. Being in a room at an average temperature of 20 degrees for an hour is fine, but if it was -60 degrees for 30 mins and 100 degrees for 30 minutes, that wouldn't be ok.

  • No matter how many white swans there are, you'll never be able to prove that all swans are white, but one black swan can disprove it.

  • The Lindy effect - things that have been around for a certain amount of time will probably be around for that amount of time into the future (presuming they're non-perishable) - Time will eliminate the rest.

  • The burden of proof is on the person who wants to introduce the intervention that goes against nature. We should use them only when the payoff is large. e.g. to save a life.

  • Via negativa - the idea of depending on the absence of things or taking things away, rather than adding things in an attempt to improve the situation. Adding things bring iatrogenics.

  • Skin in the game, or better yet, soul in the game, helps avoid the problem of transferring fragility/antifragility from one party to another without also transferring the potential downsides.

  • Look at a person's actions to see if they have skin in the game.

  • Artisans tend to have skin/soul in the game and create beneficial products as opposed to corporations that generally have to use our biases against us, and sell things that are prone to iatrogenics.

    If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

    Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

    (This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

The Black Swan - Nassim Nicholas Taleb

August 11, 2021 Conor O'Neill
2020-07-01 11.20.26 1.jpg

The Black Swan - Nassim Nicholas Taleb

3-Sentence Summary:

A “Black Swan” describes an event that is an outlier, which has an extreme impact, and is only explainable after the fact.

The impact of these Black Swans outweighs the impact of the steady, predictable trends, but they aren’t included in our usual predictive models.

We should aim to be robust against the negative Black Swans, but be open to the positive Black Swans, accepting that we can’t predict the specifics of either of these.

Notes:

  • A “Black Swan” describes an event that is an (1) Unpredictable outlier, which (2) creates an extreme impact, and which (3) human nature makes us concoct explanations for, after the fact.

  • These can include ideas, inventions, religions, historical events, success stories, failures, life events, opportunities, stock market crashes, wars, etc.

  • These Black Swans have a greater impact than the small, regular, everyday occurrences, in spite of their rarity. (History jumps, not walks).

  • To leave these out in trends as anomalies, is to risk leaving out the very thing that affected the sample most.

  • Their existence means that what you don’t know is more important than what you do know.

  • We should aim to be open to positive Black Swans and protect ourselves against potential negative Black Swans (without trying to predict the specifics of either).

  • We automatically create stories out of things that happen, so that we can be prepared in future for similar occurrences because it’s less costly than having to remember specifics, but we usually leave out Black Swans in our predictions this way. We have to train ourselves to recognise this, and be aware of it. Also, focus on how things are, vs. how they should be.

  • Things that vary exist in 2 separate worlds: 

    • 1. “Mediocristan”: Non-scalable. Things increase/decrease with time/effort. Any outlier isn’t big enough to skew the data (Height - even if someone is extremely tall (e.g 8ft), it doesn’t increase average height much among 100 other people). Outcomes are predictable and similar. Physical quality. Slow and steady. “Fair”. No Black Swans. 

    • 2. “Extremeistan”: Things increase/decrease exponentially without the proportional time/effort. Outliers are extreme and easily skew the data (Bill gates in a group of 100, brings average net worth up massively). Outcomes vary hugely. No limits. Winner takes all. Open to Black Swans.

  • Like the Turkey being well-fed every day of December, no matter how much positive information you have, it can never prove the positive theory will hold going forward (if you do, you’re falling prey to naive empiricism and/or confirmation bias). However, it only takes one negative instance (head chopped off) to disprove it. Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence.

  • Our brain prefers frequent small wins, but success usually comes from staying consistent, tinkering, trial and error, and sticking at it until you get a Black Swans. Focus on the process rather than short-term results. You don’t know when the Black Swan is coming.

  • We often miss the silent evidence when looking at a sample. E.g. “Beginner’s luck” - the gamblers who didn’t win at the start didn’t keep going, so if you ask gamblers if winner’s luck exists, you’re seeing more of those who kept going because they won at the start and kept going.  E.g. “Swimmer’s body” - It’s not swimming that gets them the body. It’s that those who made it had perfect bodies for swimming and therefore survived. E.g. Unsuccessful entrepreneurs also had the same virtues as successful. Risk taking, hard work, etc. so be aware of taking advice from the successful. Better to know the don’ts than the dos.

  • Studies show a massive difference between our confidence in our predictive abilities and the actual quality of that prediction.

  • We build toys/tools, and they change the world. We can’t predict how they will be used. E.g. computer.

  • The Barbell Strategy. Invest your time/money/effort in some extremely safe options (guard against negative Black Swans), and some extremely unpredictable options (open to positive Black Swans).

  • Things tend towards winners takes all, but if working right, the “winners” up to that point can also be taken out. (We shouldn’t bail out banks or big companies).

  • It’s better for things to fail early, as it’s less catastrophic. Also better to have plenty of smaller things to contrast the few big ones (The long tail). E.g Banks don’t have this, so failure would be disastrous.

  • Something can be a Black Swan for one person (The turkey), and not for another (The Butcher).

  • Be grateful because you being here is so unlikely that you are a Black Swan.

  • The ultimate robustness to a Black Swan: Amor Fati - Love Fate. Be prepared to lose it all and still be ok.

If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

(This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment

Fooled by Randomness - Nassim Nicholas Taleb

August 11, 2021 Conor O'Neill
unnamed.jpg

3-Sentence Summary:

We often see events as being predictable, informative of future events, and a result of skill or good judgement, even when they may have been a result of luck and chance, or the data set being skewed by random outliers or survivorship bias.

This is due to our need for stories, heuristics, and shortcuts, which allow us to make decisions in the world.

We must be on guard against these in situations where random negative events can wipe us out, but be open to potential huge positive events.

Notes:

  • Be careful not to mistake luck for skills, random outcomes for predetermined outcomes, probability for certainty, noise for signal, survivorship bias for outperformance.

  • It’s more costly to do so than the opposite way around.

  • Situations with high potential outcomes usually involved high potential negative outcomes.

  • Protect yourself against complete wipeouts, regardless of potential. (Don’t play Russian roulette, regardless of the prize money).

  • Don’t be jealous of outrageous success. You haven’t seen the full story play out yet.

  • Small losses are fine as long as the wins are massive (even though we emotionally prefer smaller, more frequent wins).

  • Beware more aware of taking lessons from $1,000,000 acquired through high-risk activities as it is less likely to replicate compared to $1,000,000 acquired through low-risk activities.

  • If the scenario was played out an infinite amount of times (Monte-Carlo Simulator), what would be the aggregate of the outcomes?

  • Ergodicity - The fluctuations/noise gets evened out over time. Things that have lasted a long time are less likely to be a result of luck/chance/randomness. History books are better than newspapers. Investing is better than day-trading.

  • Our emotions aren’t suited to this logical thinking. This is ok for things that don’t harm us (Art etc.) but not for things that are harmful.

  • Survival of the fittest is long-term. Someone currently “winning” could simply be the random mutation that eventually gets wiped out.

  • Fools tend to put too much faith in the accuracy of their beliefs, get married to positions, change their story after the fact, and not plan for losses.

  • We often only recognise the frequency of wins/losses, rather than the magnitude, even if the magnitude of one massively outweighs the other.

  • Beware of predictions based on past events, since they may not include large random events that skew everything.

  • Theories cannot be confirmed but only falsified. If it can’t be falsified (proven wrong), it’s not a legitimate theory.

  • It’s easier to remember a story, which is why we infer causality in past events.

  • Use statistics when it helps, but not if it leaves you open to wipe-out.

  • Out of an infinite amount of monkeys typing, one will eventually type one of Shakespeare’s plays, but you wouldn’t expect him to write another one on his next try.

  • Survivorship bias: Looking only at the winners (as is the case in many situations where the losers fall off) leads to an overly optimistic view of the sample.

  • It is unlikely that there will not be a part of a random pattern that looks non-random. If you were to flip a coin 1000 times, it likely that you’ll flip heads 5 times in a row at some stage. The same is true of patterns in life. Some can guess right 5 times in a row a look like a winner, when he may actually be the equivalent of the 5 heads in a row.

  • Regression to the mean: Outliers are likely to return closer to average. The biggest dog of the litter will likely end up to have pups that grow up to be smaller than them.

  • Not everything is due to luck, but it’s safer to assume so.

  • Spontaneous cancer remission happens sometimes out of the blue. This can explain some ‘miracles’ experienced by people who go to holy places, or use alternative medicine. Spontaneous cancer remission was actually shown to be slightly less frequent in those who visited Lourdes.

  • Certain events have a huge cascading effect (getting a part in a Hollywood movie, penny dropping when trying to learn something, landing a big contract). Keep going until you get these breaks.

  • Better to have a dozen raving fans than 100s who ‘like’ you.

  • Satisficing: We couldn’t make decisions if we had to be sure it was the best one. We accept near-satisfactory solutions, using our emotions, heuristics and other shortcuts. These are not completely logical, but we couldn’t make decisions without them. But be on guard.

  • If the variance of outcomes is great, the variance becomes a more important fact than the mean.

  • We must be willing to contradict ourselves, rather than defending wrong decisions.

  • Your actions are the only thing you can control from randomness. Use them heroically (do the right thing) and stoically (accept the outcomes, positive or negative) when randomness comes your way.

    If you enjoyed this summary, you’ll probably enjoy the full book. Get it here: LINK TO BOOK (AMAZON)

    Or get it for free on audiobook when you sign up for an Audible account: LINK TO AUDIOBOOK (AMAZON)

    (This website uses amazon referral links as part of the Amazon Associates program.)

Comment