Linear Personal Development

[Mounds]

This post was originally going to be rage against the machine style post, in which I rant about what I see as wrong. After a cup of coffee, I think I'm onto something.

I remember one line by Steve that I really appreciated. It was something like, "Don't do what I'm doing". I loved it. What that said to me is "Play in the sandbox and find what works for you". I cringe when I see the words "Steve is so much more advanced than many people". I can't help it. It bothers me. I don't see PD as a linear thing and so I can't see Steve as ahead of me or behind me. He's just there, doing his thing. How can I possibly measure my success against his without thinking of PD as a linear path?
Then I started thinking about it some more. What if many of us are psychologically agoraphobic? It's not actually a bad thing. IMO, it's worthwhile choosing the linear path in certain aspects of PD, like finances. There really is only a couple proper ways of doing it. Anyway you slice it, if you spend more money than you earn, you're going to go broke. You could even say the same for weight loss. If you eat less calories than you burn, then you should lose weight. No need to explore alternatives. Just do it.
What about other aspects of PD? Does it pay to go on the linear path or is it better taking the sandbox approach?
I wish I had more time to expand on this now but I have to go to work Be back later.

-Tim

[StevenHandel]

Sandbox approach times infinity.

The linear approach can be useful for a general sense of direction, but to actually make the progress you need to go in the sandbox and apply trial-and-error.

You could even say the same for weight loss. If you eat less calories than you burn, then you should lose weight. No need to explore alternatives. Just do it.

This is a very macro view of weight loss. The sandbox part comes in when you decide how you want to burn the calories and how you motivate yourself to eat better. This all includes your individual tastes and preferences. Some people like dancing, some like scenic jogging, some like tennis. But for someone who has absolutely no idea what they like, they will need to experiment with a bit of everything before they can settle on a routine.

Great post Mounds!

[SatvikBeri]

I'm not sure what you mean by "linearity" vs. "the sandbox"-to me this seems like a false dichotomy.

I tend to go by linearity. I would have ZERO motivation to work out if I didn't think I was consistently growing stronger/more fit.

However, I would say that linearity should be defined strictly around yourself. Are YOU growing? Are YOU doing better than you were before? It doesn't matter whether Steve is doing better or hobos are doing worse-what matters are the improvements you make to your life.

And an improvement based approach DOES involve experimenting, particularly with something like happiness. I am significantly happier these days than I was a year ago. To get here I tried a lot of different things, some of which worked and some of which didn't. But my motivation was always to become happier, not to experiment. If I could achieve true happiness by eating a sandwich every day I would.

So in conclusion, I think the important point is to focus on development relative to yourself, and not relative to others. Linearity and the sandbox approach aren't mutually exclusive when you're focusing on your own life.

[spacecadetglow]

Love this! Sandbox approach for me.

"Don't do what I'm doing." Love that too.

I think when we see successful people, we naturally want to replicate their behavior. To a certain degree it can be effective.

But ultimately, you gotta find your own way.

[StevenHandel]

Originally Posted by SatvikBeri

I tend to go by linearity. I would have ZERO motivation to work out if I didn't think I was consistently growing stronger/more fit.

The thing is: personal evolution is often about taking risks, going out of your comfort zone, wandering into the unknown and being uncertain. No action comes with 100% certainty and the future is often unpredictable - that is why we need to be creative and imaginative (aka play in our sandboxes).

[SatvikBeri]

Originally Posted by StevenHandel

The thing is: personal evolution is often about taking risks, going out of your comfort zone, wandering into the unknown and being uncertain. No action comes with 100% certainty and the future is often unpredictable - that is why we need to be creative and imaginative (aka play in our sandboxes).

In the rest of my post above I make the point that "Linearity" vs. "Sandbox" is a false dichotomy (to use one of James' buzzwords...). I experimented with many things to become happier, which was a sandbox approach-but the goal was to become happier, which is a linear approach.

As far as I can tell from Mounds' post, the comparison he makes is between "Mindlessly comparing yourself to others and doing what works for them" vs "Doing your own experiments". Mounds makes the point that the reason he doesn't focus on what Steve does is because Mounds doesn't think of PD as a linear path.

Mounds then, if I understand correctly, equates "Mindlessly following Steve" with "thinking of PD as a linear path"-this is the point I take issue with. I'm saying that "thinking of PD as a linear path" is independent from "Mindlessly following others", and doesn't prevent you from doing your own experiments. I'm also saying that the real point is just not to assume that whatever works for Steve (or anyone else) works for you.

tl;dr: I'm all for experimenting and using creativity, but only for the sake of linear goals like improving my own life/happiness.

[Mounds]

Got a bit more time to flesh this out

It kinda started with the "Steve is ahead of me" thing and developed even further from the "I disagree with..." thread.
Put it this way, I think many people see Steve as a leader and they will follow him. They will take what he says to heart and apply it to their lives, for better or for worse. I think that is a linear path. It's literally following someone else. When we talk about PD like that, then it is possible to say, "Steve is so much more advanced than I am". It's not a bad thing, it's human nature. Leaders will rise and people will follow (although they hate admitting it!).
The sandbox style of PD is more where you blaze your own trail. You're off doing your thing, I'm off doing mine, Steve's off doing his. There is no way to say "Steve is ahead of me" because you're not on the same path. That's more my style.
There are exceptions when it comes to things that are easy to follow systematically. For me, that's things like exercise and food. I really don't feel like reinventing the wheel here so I just go with whatever the guru's say. It works well for me and allows me to focus on other things that lead to my happiness.
The healthy approach for me is play in my sandbox and once in a while join in with some other peeps, when I want a free ride Once in a while I even join in on Steve's congo line but not too often. I still find it funny that he kicked sand in the face of half his followers. Even funnier was the reactions, lol.
Anyhow, I'm outta here.

-Tim

[Brutha]

If you look at the research of successful weight loss there's often a single incident that gets people to change their ways. It's not linear.

[spacecadetglow]

I LOLed at "Steve's Congo Line" Mounds.

I thought the "I disagree with everyone..." thread was a bit juvenile, myself. Not to mention arrogant. Kind of turned me off to Steve.