Wisdom
There’s this thing people say: “if the 16 year old version of me saw this they’d kick my ass.” It always seems to show up around matters of responsibility, compromise, maturity, finances or anything we’d have once labeled “adult.”
I think the underpinning assumptions of this quip are so baseless as to deserve reconsideration. Namely, who gives a fuck what a 16 year old cares about anything? [For this, see whatever pseudo-strawman age we come up with to denigrate ourselves against.]
As we get older, we’re made aware of three inalterable truths about our existences. That there is a objective reality outside ourselves. Then there is what we want this reality to be. And that these two facts overlap less often than we’d like and more often than we probably deserve. The longer you’ve meditated on this, the wiser you are.
Yet, here we are comparing ourselves to a child in order to judge the rightness or wrongness of decisions we make about our lives.
It might feel like there is some refreshing certainty in ignorance but it is a chimera. Ignore for a second what you remember yourself as at [any age] and hold in your mind what the average representative of that group is like. Chances are you were much closer to the latter than the former. (Have you talked to a 16 year old recently? That’s who you think knows what’s important?)
The key is to hold yourself against something who has more of a sense of the world, not less—or worse, someone who doesn’t know it at all. To consider it from the perspective of a man. Notice how we never seem to say: what would 40 year old me think of this? And naturally, it’d be better to take ourselves out of the equation entirely, find someone who surpasses us, and ask how they would feel.
This was poorly written. Besides the lackluster syntactical constructions, the tone achieves precisely the opposite of what you intend; arrogance and admonishments rarely mix well, particular from someone as young as yourself. Unfortunately, behind the poor writing lies weak philosophy. “who gives a fuck what a 16 year old cares about anything?” The many people you address for starters.
In case you are interested in honest intellectual development, the theme of staying true to your younger ideals runs throughout much contemporary literature. You of all people should have known this. Your 16 year old self may well be an idiot unworthy of serious attention, but most people look back toward their younger values because of the placating effect modern society has on our natural exuberances. The widespread socialization of passionate, involved people into sedated couch potatoes earns its derision from the daily toll it takes on our happiness. In many instances, the younger version of ourselves should kick our ass for the pathetic unprincipled people we’ve become.
I could make this point clearer, but I see no reason to give you what you so obstinately deny others. You are highly intelligent, capable writer, and you’ve wielded your talent like a weapon against those who could benefit from your efforts.
Lackluster syntactical constructions! Let me know how you’d like me to write for you in the future.
Staying true to form, you ignore the salient point.
The problem Brian is that you don’t have a salient point. You’re just an obnoxious troll. What does it matter that youthful idealism is a theme in contemporary literature? It’s a false idol. Really, you think the best [flippant] judge of a situation is a child? Someone with no sense of life, of fate, of pain or pleasure, of humility, of duty or any of the critical virtues of being a good person? Maybe it’s just me but I’m going to have to go with a big NO on that one.
The notion that younger people are more principled is preposterous. And it’s sad to see people apply that bogus standard against themselves–most often out of some perverse flagellative impulse to punish themselves for being a mature, responsible adult.
The salient point is that you fail to sympathetically engage the opposing view. As if you are above considering the reasons of those who think differently.
If nothing else, the widespread appeal to youthful idealism by intellignet people should suggest that there are reasons worth considering.
@Ryan “The problem Brian is that you don’t have a salient point. ”
You make me laugh Ryan. Brian’s comment has actually given this vacuous post some substance, and provided it some direction. And for doing that you call him a troll?! I used to visit this blog for your fresh child-like insights into life. But you’re increasingly sounding like a crabby old man. You know what…you need to get a blowjob. That’ll fix it. You need to get out more. 😉
Considering the fake email you used for your comment, I’d say the reason you probably like Brian’s comment is because you wrote it. And dude, honestly not enough people read this site for it to be worth you going through those motions. If you want to keep at it, have fun. I don’t mind.
That sounds about right. It’s exactly what a 16 year old would do.
sigh. So thats how you deal with disagreement? Conjuring up weird lone conspirators out to make you look bad?
I wish I’d written my comment without the harsh ego bash, which just about anyone would react negatively to. Bad rhetoric, I admit. But the point remains – you’re “insights” have become increasingly self-aggrandising, and at the cost of thoughtful reflection.
Cramming as many large words into a sentence as possible doesn’t make you smart.
It doesn’t, by itself, make them stupid either.
It’s a decent clue though.
First, I haven’t heard ANYONE say “If the 16 year old version of me saw this they’d kick my ass”. So quit tilting at imaginary windmills and dedicating whole posts to your Quixotic ruminations (maybe you should get out more).
Secondly, the point Brian makes (which you’d probably see if you stepped off your high horse for a minute) is that unless we take the effort to protect the child-like in our nature, it can get trampled by our mindless material pursuits.
In fact, today’s quote by Abraham Hicks happens to address this very concern…
“Your children are genius creators who have just arrived from Nonphysical,
who are feeling empowered. And if they would be left to their own devices,
they would not go astray. They would maintain worthiness; they would
maintain their feeling of Well-Being. They would thrive, unless it was
taught otherwise to them. In other words, if others don’t do something to
change their vibration, they are in a vibration of thriving.”
— Abraham
Was this ment as an example of how to “sympathetically engage the opposing view”?
When you’re done missing the forest for the trees, do get out for some fresh air. It will do you good.
If I saw the 16 year old version of myself I would kick his ass.
This is interesting from more of a psychological standpoint than a philosophical. I am able to think and analyze situations one hundred times better than at 16. Brian makes the point that he and others have become pathetic and unprincipled as modern society has MADE them sedated couch potatoes. Ryan and I look for ways to improve our lives and beliefs through studying the inefficiencies of other people who completely miss the point. Why would I want to ask my former self at 16 when I could ask my present, more informed self right now?
I think you’re right in pointing out the existence of a narrative fallacy of sort when we compare ourselves to our younger selves. We build a serlf-serving narrative that benefits us today and disregard the individual reality of the past. It’s a form of self-absorbtion benefiting a delusion. Did I have any principle at 16? I don’t know, but saying “My 16 years old self would kick my ass” implies that I did and still do in some abstract way.
But once you recognize than this idea is an abstract construct, why would pinning yourself up against another one (40 years old self) be any different? I can totally see how “the most usefull representation of myself at 16” — the one implying that you ever had principle you were ready to act upon, the one that distract you from the fact that you’ve never shown such inclination — could not be as seductively turned into “the most useful repersentation of myself as a 40 years old”.
“Hmmmm, what would 40 years old me say if he saw me right now? I don’t know, but I’ve just imagined myself as Don Drapper” (we all read TLP). It gets to be self-serving in a different way: “I may not have any “X” now, but in the futur I’ll….”.
———
[Random thoughts]
Those construct we use tell something about ourselves. My question is, not why would someone compare themselves to an idealized 16 years old, but what is the purpose of making that kind of statement in the first place?
“if the 16 year old version of me saw this they’d kick my ass”
“I’ve failed to be the person I think I should be.” Then basculate to the other construct : “But in the futur I’ll…”
Fixating on past and futur, both of which implies something about yourself today without you having to do anything, both of which distract you from the reality of the present, both of which indicate that you might be after something that doesn’t exist.
I’m not saying your 40 year old self would be less seductive but we when we compare ourselves to youth in this way we’re lionizing different traits than when we would be when we compare ourselves to an older self. I tend to think that the latter are more admirable than the former traits. (think: brash and uncompromising vs subdued and content)
But I’m not sure that the people which are most likely to think of themselves in those terms (“16 years old self”) will ever act on the specific of those thought and that, therefore, It is not so much about what the thought lionize as it is about the system that gave rize to this kind of thinking.
(BTW, typo in the sixth paragraph of the blog post, just noticed: “They key”).
“… people look back toward their younger values because of the placating effect modern society has on our natural exuberances.”
–
“No one “aims” to end up part of a massive shell game, deluding themselves and others. At some point, they broke… You make bargains like “80 hours a week for the next 50 years” and “yeah, I’ll sell a product I know is worthless.” Then you’re fucked.”
–
In many instances, the younger version of ourselves should kick our ass for the pathetic unprincipled people we’ve become.”
–
“Your daimon is sort of like your inner-child. Your purity. Your passion. Your clearheadness. The ability to look at problems and solve them instead of accepting them.”
“16 year old me would kick my ass” = “I sold out. I lost my daimon.”
That’s what I think Brian was trying to get across.
Just picked up How to Live by Sarah Bakewell.. nice recommendation.
It always astonishes me when people get bent out of shape about things you post. Because most of the time, it’s the last thing I’d figure they’d start an argument about. There’s been stuff you’ve posted that’s made me raise an eyebrow and disagree, but the stuff people flip their shit about always seems to be the stuff that I’d figure was innocent. Like a few months ago when someone decided that you were obviously a sexist because you were critiquing the strategy of sites like Jezebel.
So moving on to a different question that’s been kicking around me for a bit, what do you do to ensure you’re not learning too much from the same group of perspectives? I know you mentioned before that lots of the books you started with were recommended or given to you by Tucker, but also that you tried to read at least one book in the bibliography of every book you read. Is there anything else you try to do?
I ask because I started reading with the stuff I saw talked about on the RMMB like Robert Greene/Marcus Aurelius. Over time though, I’ve found that your site supplies enough books for me to check out that I have a backlog of stuff I want to read, but most of it’s coming from you. Sure I read Godin, Umair, and The Last Psychiatrist, but all of those I still found out about from you/RMMB members. It doesn’t seem like it’s wise to be pulling so strongly from one group of perspectives for learning, but I’m the only one of my friends who reads to learn.
Well I would say you should read the stuff that interests you, not what I recommend. Or, rather, read the recommendations I have that line up with your interests and explore on your own. The next book sort of sells itself.
“To consider it from the perspective of a man”
Or woman. Because not everyone is male, and I get the impression that you’re trying to theorise about people in general and not just talk about yourself.
I assume that was an error of egocentrism rather than an implication that men have “more of a sense of the world” than women.
But still it’s very irritating for people who happen to be female.
Personally I’d be interested in the perspective of myself aged 16, because I was quite thoughtful at that age and had interesting opinions, and a different perspective than I do now.
Do you really not give a fuck what any 16 year old cares about anything? No possibility that anyone aged 16 knows ANYTHING better than you do? Sure I’ve changed since I was 16, but I’m not arrogant enough to think I’ve simply progressed for that whole time. Life isn’t like that. Some things I’ve become jaded about, in some ways I’ve lost trust and optimism that might now make a useful counterpoint to the experience I’ve later acquired.
The gender thing I think was a simple oversight, some lazy phrasing. Your disrespect of young people sounds rather more like prejudice.
No, I meant a MAN. As in the the ancient and philosophic concept of a responsible, moral and strong adult who takes care of themselves, their family and their duties. There was no oversight on my part, just some unnecessary projection and insecurity on yours. I can only imagine what you were like at 16. I’m not sure if it would be something people would want to judge themselves against.
I think maybe the goal is to stay off the hamster wheel and to consciously avoid bitterness. I am 25 years old, a young man, but I think a lot about how I was as an even younger person. Rosy retrospection alters many specific recollections, but I do remember being more lighthearted. I remember sleeping peacefully and waking up happy. I remember not giving a shit about politics (I only give a small shit now, one or two rabbit pellets at the most).
This does not go to say that I am less happy now than I was then. I am more conscious though, and this heightened consciousness can be a tricky thing if not properly directed. There is so much to think about and often I can not shake the feeling that in most cases I am wasting valuable mental energy better spent watching the clouds roll by.
My take on wisdom is that wise people know how to think deeply about the world while repelling bitterness.
If I ran into my sixteen year old self on the street, I’d probably kick me in the fucking teeth. I honestly had no idea people actually used that as a measuring stick for their lives.
I always thought of life as:
I’m going to die someday –> shit, I’d better get going on what I want out of life –> what do I want out of life? —> go get it.
Philosophy for me was always a method for figuring out the “what do I want out of life?” part, to keep myself from being seduced and trapped by one part or another of “the game” (i.e. becoming most of the characters in “American Beauty”). From your post I’m guessing your answer is, “We should try and emulate the ideal of a wiser role-model than ourselves rather than an airy-headed idiot for evaluating questions such as these.” Fair enough, I don’t see any controversy behind that statement. I guess the only challenge I would hold up to it is this: why do we not use what we ourselves want at this point in our lives to decide where we want to take it? I don’t need Cato to tell me I hate my job and always loved flower arranging. It seems that I of my own faculties can deduce that gee, maybe I should quit my job and open a flower shop. Like I said, for me philosophy always helped in the negative, to make sure I didn’t start valuing spurious prizes in favour of life’s true treasures.
Of course. That’s actually sort of what I’m getting at. But I think you can see from the comments here that there is indeed a great deal of controversy behind that statement. Definitely more than I thought there would be.
It happens that for me, I don’t find a lot of use in comparing myself to a particular model (although as an amalgam there is a lot of value). I like to think I have a good sense of who I want to be and use that as my benchmark. But dude, you’re being a bit unrealistic if you think most people are that way.