I forgot that I said this but a long time ago I wrote that The Long Tail was a theory you HAD to be familiar with. Someone else asked what other theories should be required knowledge for young people. I can only answer what works for me, but I’ll give it a shot.

You should know Alinsky’s strategies for community organizing, John Robb’s theory of networked, guerrilla warfare, what Matt Mason calls “the Pirate’s dilemma”, the concept of a “blue oceans” Wikinomics (specifically, ideagoras or information bazaars) and I like Rob Walker’s “murketing.” You could also make the case that a healthy understanding of how hustlers create advantage, as compared to normal entrepreneurs, is increasingly important.

A couple others I might add, would be Snark (not the book, read this article) and narcissism/narrative fallacy, for the reason that they both derail and delude a lot of people online.

You could read all the books and I’ve linked to them before but thought it might be interesting if I tried to define all of them over the next few weeks. We could put it together into some kind of introduction for beginners. Your thoughts and input are welcome below.

I used to carry a lot of fear. What if I lose this? Or, ‘I have to monitor that in case something bad happens.’ Worse, I would be unsure of how to act in certain situations, whether to advance or maintain or do whatever else somebody asked me to do right away. I was petrified of anything that could be considered a step backwards. I think I once wrote that I promised myself I’d never work on a wage-basis ever again.

Now I’m starting to understand that this was foolish. It’s an attitude prevalent in what Robert calls “tactical hell.” After I formulated, at least ephemerally, what I was after, the feelings melted away. In fact, in laying out and looking at the chessboard I saw instances where there was not only nothing shameful in taking a job like that but doing so would be the best possible move.

This is what is known as Grand Strategy. It means knowing in a very deep way what it is you’re trying to accomplish. It’s important because once you understand where you intend to finish in that distant, far off sense, you can take in, in perspective, how insignificant many individual decisions are. Left or right, what does it matter? Take this, leave that – knowing how you can turn either to a productive, contributive step means you’re less dependent on circumstance and less anxiety for you to carry.

Let’s say you wanted to become something like Tyler Cowen. Tactical hell would be thinking of ways to acquire what he possesses – getting a huge audience, bothering an editor at the New York Times Book Review, setting up a blog and trying to get linked by other important writers. It would be hell because you’d probably fail at each of these things. Grand strategy would be to think of what and why you want to be like Tyler. Perhaps, it’s that he’s paid to be curious or that you think you’d find fulfillment in the intellectually productive life he appears to lead. The separation of the person and the position leads to an understanding that latter flows from the former. The grand strategy is clear.

Whether you choose this class or that one, work or travel, books or people, these are small, tactical decisions. You know that the standing order is to turn each into an interesting, engaging process; everything is a challenge to examine and a chance for insight.

Think about Fight Club. The whole, it’s only after you’ve lost everything that you’re free to do anything. Well what does he really mean? I think what he’s saying has little to do with possessions. He means that after you’ve cleared out dependency and distractions, you acquire, in a way, a kind of grand strategy: a sense of self. When that becomes your only guiding principle, what is happening on the outside is irrelevant. You’re free because grand strategy gives way to formlessness. And formlessness to peace and calm and self-assurance.

Some proof that good fiction has its roots in science and research:

“When we are green, still half-created, we believe that our dreams are rights, that the world is disposed to act in our best interests, and that falling and dying are for quitters. We live on the innocent and monstrous assurance that we alone, of all the people ever born, have a special arrangement whereby we will be allowed to stay green forever”

This Boy’s Life

Tobias Wolff

“Psychologist David Elkind introduced two theories in a 1967 paper on adolescents and egocentrism. He suggested that adolescents exist in an empathetically compromised state of egocentrism and that typical teens live their lives as thought they were on a grand stage in front of an attentive audience. Because every action is so important to them, these teens assume that their actions are of equal interest and importance to those around them, that they are performing before a constant imaginary audience. The personal fable theory describes a belief on the part of the adolescent that he or she is unique and special and that when it comes to pursuing his or her destiny, the conventional rules don’t apply. In theory, most teens grow of these dramatic, egocentric stages, as they successfully negotiate a separation from their parents and emerge with unique identities as mature adults.

The Mirror Effect: How Celebrity Narcissism is Seducing America

Dr. Drew Pinsky

At first glance, Personal Fable Theory sounds a lot like the Narrative Fallacy. Both the This Boy’s Life and The Mirror Effect are very good. Connections are everywhere.