This note is for you Steve.

[ImOpen]

This will probably sound very harsh. I'm sorry for that, I don't mean to. Hard to express yourself in a different language...

Anyway... you are writing about raising your awareness, about your purpose in life and so forth. You are writing about personal development - but still you seem to neglect an area of your life constantly - the "Cultural Pavlina".

Have you even read Dostoyevsky? Strindberg? Blake? Faulkner? Voltaire? Rimbaud? Do you know a van Gough when you see one and how many times have you been outside of the US? Have you seen the children dying in the smelly streets of India and have you seen the sun go down over the Mediterranean.

I think not and I think that doing these things would alter the way you see the world considerably. Actaully, I think it's a bit hard to take your advice seriously when I'm aware of the fact that you live in the USA and have not seen very much else of the world.

I mean... you yourself talk about how important knowledge is and that you should be open etc. Shouldn't you be reading some Nietzsche and Schopenhauer just to make sure that you haven't missed out on anything? Because, these things: travelling, education (and meeting people) are very good ways to improve yourself and the best part is that they don't make you "strive" so much after things that you can never be satisfied with anyway - like networth and so on.

(Also, pleeeeease remove "personal development for smart people". It's so transparent.)

[Jim]

Originally Posted by ImOpen

I think not and I think that doing these things would alter the way you see the world considerably. Actaully, I think it's a bit hard to take your advice seriously when I'm aware of the fact that you live in the USA and have not seen very much else of the world.

Isn't this a bit of a strawman argument; since he hasn't seen everything therefore we accept nothing?

Identifying a Van Gough might be nice if you're going to be on Jeopardy but the very fact that you releate these academic items as terms for credibility just shows that you don't "get it".

Steve and all others concerned are here to help others and you don't necessarily do this by embracing academic snobbery and quoting Faulkner.

You do this by giving *practical* solutions to help those in need through the hard times. Steve is the master at this.

[michael.shearer]

What makes people dying in the streets in India different from people dying in floods in New Orleans? What makes a sunset over the Mediterrean more beautiful than one in the deserts of Nevada? What makes your perspective of life and it's importance make Steve's perspective of lesser importance? Is it because thousands of people openly appreciate Steve and his work and possibly few people value yours? Instead of combating with Steve about his viewpoints, why not build your own repository of insight? I didn't notice a blog link or other in your signature, otherwise I would have clicked it.

In other words, what are you really getting at? Are you trying to help Steve grow...awesome, as you noticed, he's all for it. Are you trying to lessen his credibility...tough luck, that is in the eye of the beholder.

Namaste,

Michael

[ImOpen]

Jim, thanks for your answer. I was awaiting these types of answers.
Of course I am not talking about "embracing academic snobbery". Of course not!

These were just examples. I was talking about cultivating a different side of yourself. You don't have to quote Faulkner, you could write your own poems instead. I know that this is a not so usual way to see things in the US, because it doesn't go together so well with the notion of materialism. But I think you you should give it a try. - At least a "30 day trial"... because "Steve is the master at this" and that is his own idea.

(Also, read more by Kerouac, you Dharma bum . He has some great ideas.)

[ImOpen]

Originally Posted by michael.shearer

In other words, what are you really getting at? Are you trying to help Steve grow...awesome, as you noticed, he's all for it. Are you trying to lessen his credibility...tough luck, that is in the eye of the beholder.

Namaste,

Michael

Michael Shearer. I don't try to harm people. I love people. I really do.
But by discussion I find that I develop, that is why I am here. It is a discussion forum after all.
We are not here just to admire Pavlina.... riiiiight? *confused*
(Altough I admire some things )

[michael.shearer]

You did give fair warning in the entrance of your post. I just feel like Steve has helped a great amount of people in some respect and that is valuable. I bet Steve would be the first to admit that he still has a limited perspective when it comes to the criteria you've laid forth, but, I'm sure he has an educated response, as well. And of course, with subjective reality, he has no idea it is there unless it comes to his awareness.

Be well Imopen.

Love,
Michael

[Scott H Young]

ImOpen,

Steve isn't a god, remember he's a mere mortal just like us.

Each persons experiences give them insights into life in different ways. Steve may have less broader cultural experience, but he has an abundance of great self-help ideas. Besides, he isn't even forty yet so give him some time

[Dolazy]

Originally Posted by ImOpen

This will probably sound very harsh. I'm sorry for that, I don't mean to. Hard to express yourself in a different language...

Anyway... you are writing about raising your awareness, about your purpose in life and so forth. You are writing about personal development - but still you seem to neglect an area of your life constantly - the "Cultural Pavlina".

Have you even read Dostoyevsky? Strindberg? Blake? Faulkner? Voltaire? Rimbaud? Do you know a van Gough when you see one and how many times have you been outside of the US? Have you seen the children dying in the smelly streets of India and have you seen the sun go down over the Mediterranean.

It's a bit harshly worded I think you may have a point. I myself haven't read Dostoyevsky and those other authors but I think they would greatly enrich my mind. However, keep in mind that you do not know whether he has read these books or not. He reads a LOT (several books a week if I remember well from his articles). So it may well be that he actually is familiar with all these works.

Also, he is just writing down what has worked for him. He is sharing his collected wisdom with others so that they can benefit from it as well. I see no reason to criticize that, I feel rather thankful.

And "for smart people" is good, it keeps the stupid away. ...Well, maybe

Francis

[ImOpen]

Originally Posted by Scott H Young

ImOpen,

Steve isn't a god, remember he's a mere mortal just like us.

Hehe, I won't forget that. I promise!
I just like some of his articles and my guess would be that he could make a greater contribution by cultivating this side of him. And the answer why I am writing about this is that I haven't seen him doing it so much.

Also, it doesn't feel right talking about a person in this way, but I guess that is inevitable when the domain name is www.stevepavlina.com

"And 'for smart people' is good, it keeps the stupid away. ...Well, maybe" I actually feel the exact opposite way. No need to stress that. Very "smart" (I don't even believe in that notion) will probably shy away from a place declared for the smart ones. It feels like a trick.

[RandomJohn]

I always assumed that "Personal Development for Smart People" was intended to be a play on the "for Dummies" book series.

At any rate, if I read Dostoyevsky, I'll enrich my mind. (Maybe, actually I have tried to read Dostoyevsky and rather suffered an implosion, but maybe I just don't resonate with it. ) If I read A Course in Miracles, or travel to the streets of India, or whatever, I'll enrich my mind. Maybe one day I'll do some of these things, and in the meantime I'll do other things to enrich my mind.

I'm probably not the only person here with this approach, I imagine ...

[Baltar]

Originally Posted by ImOpen

"And 'for smart people' is good, it keeps the stupid away. ...Well, maybe" I actually feel the exact opposite way. No need to stress that. Very "smart" (I don't even believe in that notion) will probably shy away from a place declared for the smart ones. It feels like a trick.

I think it's quite the opposite. Web sites that want to trick you would try to attract dumb people, not smart people. Saying that the site is for smart people hardly helps to attract dumb people. Do you know what a site for dumb people looks like? If not then here's a funny parody of such sites. It's worth checking out just for the humorous value alone.

[Hsiang-Lin]

I think by "smart," he's addressing the people who use their critical thinking abilities to reason out an issue rather than making up their minds on something before fully understanding it.

That's why reading all these books and talking to all these so-called experts doesn't necessarily make you a "smart" man. The smartest man is the one who approaches life and learning with a beginner's mind.

[Jon]

By the way, it's van Gogh. I don't normally spell check on forums, but since you made a point of identifying his works, you should know how the name is spelled.

[markholden]

ImOpen, please forgive me for being harsh, but I just can't see your point. It seems to me that your argument goes something like this: Steve doesn't know everything, therefore his opinions can't be valid; in particular, since Steve hasn't experienced certain items of culture, such as Faulker, van Gogh, and Nietzsche, that either enhance or contradict his ideas, his opinions can't be valid. Yes?

How does that make any sense? What do you want him to be? God? No person can know and experience everything; nobody is infallible. Is that going to stop you from listening to good advice when you hear it? By your logic, you shouldn't trust Dostoevsky or Nietzsche any more than you should trust Steve.

For what it's worth, of the names you name, I've read Dostoevsky, Blake, Voltaire, Nietzsche, and Faulkner, I know a van Gogh when I see it, and I find Steve Pavlina's insights into life tremendously valuable. I don't see a contradiction there.

[ImOpen]

It seems to me that your argument goes something like this: Steve doesn't know everything, therefore his opinions can't be valid; in particular, since Steve hasn't experienced certain items of culture, such as Faulker, van Gogh, and Nietzsche, that either enhance or contradict his ideas, his opinions can't be valid. Yes?

Yes? Are you kidding? No!!!
I wanted to point out a place to continue with personal development.
Because I think his articles will get better from it.

I'm so sorry I offended your God...

[Hsiang-Lin]

I think ImOpen is suggesting Steve to explore the important historical works of art and philosophy to gain a deeper insight into personal development.

I've thought the same thing, but at the same time I also realize that you can't have everything good at once. I believe Steve has legitimate personal reasons for exploring the topics and fields he writes about in his articles. He embraces the philosophy of productivity so I have no doubt he believes what he is doing now is the best use of his time.

I feel this is similar to what people use to tell me to do with regards to sarging. "Get a girlfriend!" "Find someone for a relationship!" "You're a great person, share your love with someone else!" The last one was a particularly deceptive one and it often made me do things I really didn't want to do (but hey it was good for going out of my comfort zone!).

But the bottom line is that people will tell you things that are good for you and they may be right. But there is a big difference between doing what's good for you and doing what's good for you BY CHOICE.

[karkaremtg]

in twenty years of living here, I have not seen a single kid dying in any street 'smelly' or not. How have your 'travels' lead you to this conclusion ImOpen?

[ImOpen]

Originally Posted by karkaremtg

in twenty years of living here, I have not seen a single kid dying in any street 'smelly' or not. How have your 'travels' lead you to this conclusion ImOpen?

I've been in Kerala for a month. Street children were everywere and some of them didn't exacly look like they had the time of their life. Also, I did not mean to "degrade" India. I would love to visit it again.

[ImOpen]

I've reread my first post and I understand that I wrote it in a too harsh way and as I said I never meant to. Just hard in a different language.... I hope my other posts in this thread have helped in explaining my point.

[Michael Chui]

Didja notice his latest blog post?

[ImOpen]

joolich: Please don't be rude. You are free to discuss this subject with me and the rest of the forum. Otherwise, keep it for yourself.
edit. His post seems to have been deleted. Weird. Anyway he was attacking me and in a sarcastic tone told me that I had opened they eyes of everyone and that I should make Steve pay for my advice. He also misunderstood my whole post and thought that I said that "the world sucks" and therefore we should stop developing ourself.
edi2. Just got a PM with an excuse and of course I fully accept it. We all make mistakes. No harm done.

Michael Chui: I started this thread before he posted that. I am pleased to see it.

[Keith]

I believe that all ImOpen was saying is:

Steve's writings imply that he focuses almost entirely on targetted self-development experiences (Toastmasters, books about self-development etc.). If this is true, then Steve may be missing out on some less obvious avenues of self-development. Steve has stated that he reads almost no fiction, yet some of the most insightful books (and plays, etc.) on being human have been fiction. Other art (such as painting) also expresses humanness in a own unique way. The experiences that come with international travel are similarly great eye (and mind!) openers.

As far as I can see, ImOpen was just offering a way for Steve to step out of his comfort zone and experience an aspect of self-development that he may not have considered in his targetted self-development focus.

ImOpen admitted to having difficulty expressing himself in english, so I think we can cut him some slack if he didn't state it perfectly.

P.S. ImOpen I found "Self Development for Smart People" a little confronting at first too, but I think you'll find that it's as counter to the "For Dummies" series of books. ie. the "For Dummies" series imply that things are easy (any dummy can do them) whereas Steve is saying it'll take more work. I understand the play on words, but I wish he'd chosen different ones ; someone with an 80 IQ can be as dedicated to Self Development as a genius (and quite possibly more so).

[Nancy Lebovitz]

Imopen, you framed knowledge of culture as a challenge or a standard--if you've found books, music, or travel have contributed a lot to you, it'd be great if you'd go into some detail about what books, music or whatever and how they've expanded your understanding of the world.