[Alvin]

Originally Posted by bix

Forked from this thread.

I am one of those concerned with the apparent decrease in the quality of articles on this site. Over the last two years I have found that the articles are discussing increasingly abstract things and are less and less applicable to real life.

Then why keep reading Bix? I used to love lifehack.org but now I feel their quality of content has gone down, so I've unsubscribed to their feed.

Originally Posted by bix

I think this is largely because Steve has started treating his self-improvement skills as a tradeable value and has started relying on them to generate money.

I do not have any problems with people making money any way they like, but there are several areas which can not be monetized without adverse effects. I believe offering advice on self-improvement is one such area.

So...is your argument:

1) Making money and self-improvement don't match?

2) Steve's quality of articles has decreased?

3) Making money out of his articles has caused his quality to decrease?

Originally Posted by bix

Imagine a casual tennis player. When he goes pro, he starts playing better.

Well, true. But what's also true is that most of the NBA coaches would get their asses whipped on the courts by the players they coach anytime. They may not outperform them, but they know how to get them to perform, which are 2 different skills.

An excellent trumpet player may play a mean set for eg, but it doesn't mean he knows how to teach someone to do the same.

Originally Posted by bix

Now imagine a casual self-improvement advisor. When he goes pro, he does not start providing better advice, he starts providing a different advice and he starts providing more of it. Best self-improvement ideas come not from "experts" on self-improvement who do this full time but rather from brick workers or software developers or working moms sharing their thoughts and recipes on how to go by in everyday life.

Really? What kind of best self-improvement ideas by which working mom?

Originally Posted by bix

There are numerous reasons why the advice offered by self-improvement "experts" generally sucks. For one thing, such "experts" do not spend enough time in real life and thus do not know what the real problems are. Thus, they all try to "bring the discussion to a higher level" where they can try and talk abstract things. Every now and then, they may also give some practical advice in a real-life area that they recently had to touch, eg, how to speak to people, or how to plan a travel. You can tell that the advice given in this area is immensely more useful than the abstract stuff they throw at you. Alas, the number of real-life areas that they can give advice on is usually not very high and besides that, how many times do you have to hear that if you have to talk to a group of people then you'd better sleep the night before and feel calm and perhaps do a self-rehearsal.

Haha this is funny. Is there a unreal life if there's a real one?

There are many levels of advice on self-improvement you can take. For a nitty-gritty back to specifics level on time management I'd go to 43folders and the excellent advice of GTD.

To whip my body back into shape, I might seek out a bodybuilding expert or a yoga instructor.

To help my deepen my relationship with my girlfriend, I might read someone like Barbara DeAngelis and pick up specific techniques like the Love Letter that I can use.

But I don't always want to spend my time on the ground. I want to move to higher principles and abstract ideas too, since the more abstract an idea, the more power it usually holds over specific ideas (fruits encompass the whole family of fruits compared to knowing about apples and bananas).

I will give it to you, Bix, that there are many self-improvement instructors out there who give nothing but fluffy abstract talk while having no idea how to do the specifics.

But to say 'There are numerous reasons why the advice offered by self-improvement "experts" generally sucks' is an interesting belief. If self-improvement experts generally suck, why are you reading in the first place? Are there any self-improvement 'experts' which you don't think suck?

Originally Posted by bix

Second, self-improvement "experts" are preoccupied with the requirement to make a living. You know, one day they will be having "an unconscious intention to manifest" some money. You can be sure that they will "recognize" that intention and if they will have any "fears" related to the "outcome" of that intention, these fears will ultimately be overcame. That's where you start seeing tricks aimed to bring more people to the website, recommendations for products, and even ponzi schemes (please tell me how much self-improvement advice you got out of this post on Ing Direct). You also start seeing articles which are either controversial or are written with a tongue in cheek. The purpose of these articles is to bring traffic (oh, why, of course, to "initiate the discussion" and get some clicks on ads). The amount of practical advice offered by the site decreases even more.

Who isn't preoccupied with the requirement to make a living? I don't mind that Steve's articles are tongue in cheek and controversial, rather that than stick in the mud and toeing the line.

Originally Posted by bix

There are other reasons, too.

The moment someone starts treating self-improvement as a business, the value in his advice evaporates. I am deeply saddened that Steve has decided to go this route.

Bix, let me see if I understand your points:

1) Self improvement as a business doesn't work.

2) Once you start selling self improvement for a living, the quality of your advice drops.

3) Self-improvement advice is best had from people doing it part-time because they're involved in 'real' life.

4) More specifics for self-improvement rather than the general abstract advice you've been seeing the last few posts would make you happier.