I recently completed my first Webflow related gig. Pretty exciting stuff! The job was to develop an already-made design. Here’s the landing page that I built. Here’s the link to see the back end if you’re interested.
I’m not gonna lie, at first I was nervous that I wouldn’t be able to do everything. But then a wise Webflow developer told me everyone learns something new when they build.
And he was right, I did learn how to tackle every obstacle that came my way. This gives me the confidence to take on even more challenges. Because even if I don’t know how to do a certain thing in Webflow, I know I can figure it out.
I’m thinking of writing a reflection after every project I take on, where I document all the things I learned throughout each project. This is in case I later forget how I did something, but also to help others by publishing all the resources that were useful to me. And, maybe more importantly, to show aspiring Webflow developers (like myself) that you don’t have to know everything to take on a project. Be confident that you’ll figure things out.
I only had little experience using Figma, but now I know how to extract assets and find the exact styles I need to copy. I found this series of videos from Waldo Broodryk to be very helpful. I ended up following his whole process. Waldo was essentially my companion throughout my project. It was exactly what I needed!
The slider on the hero section of this project gave me a lot of trouble. But in the end, I learned a lot about how to manipulate sliders in pretty much any way I want. I have to thank Nelson Abalos for personally helping me get unstuck on this.
This projects design had many sections where a row of elements on desktop turned into a slider on mobile. I thought this was a great way to present things to the mobile user (much better than showing a long list of items stacked on top of each other) so I had to find a way to do this.
My first instinct was to create two sections, one that contains columns of the cards and one that has a slider, then do “display: none” accordingly, so only the column section shows up on desktop and the slider on mobile.
But then I found a little hack in this forum post. The solution: make the desktop version as a slider and hide the arrows and dots. Set the width of each card to the percentage depending on how many cards you want. There’s more to it, but you get the gist.
I always knew it’s important to compress your images, but I wanted to check what was acceptable. Answer: under 500 KB. Also learned that the page size should be under 5 MB.
I needed to figure out how to edit the dots from the slide. Found this helpful vid. Apparently you need to do some custom code.
For the blog list, I needed to make the images the same size and dimensions, even though the images are different sizes. Also I didn’t want them to stretch to fit the dimension. I found this great guide.
The fact that you have to give a certain percentage of padding to the container is so counter intuitive. I would have never figured it out. This will come in handy for future projects.
I think I can improve on creating a more sound naming system. While I was conscious about doing this, I’m afraid I wasn’t consistent enough.
Shout out to Waldo Broodrÿk for taking his time to give me a bunch of advice on how to turn Webflow web development into a career. Also to Nelson for helping me figure out sliders, and for his countless YouTube videos that taught me so much. Finally, I want to thank Matt, who took a chance on me and gave me the job. Because of him I feel energized to search for more Webflow related opportunities.
Excited to see where this will take me.
Sooo we're in the middle of a pandemic. People are getting sick, the country is semi-quarantined, and many businesses are shut down. The future is as uncertain as ever.
Right before that, I was in the verge of landing a job I really wanted. I was so sure of it -- I had a bad ass pitch with a value proposition that was impossible to ignore. Unfortunately, the business I pitched to, like so many other businesses, was hit hard by this thing and is no longer in a position to hire any time soon. Just my luck.
I don't know when things will get better, or what the landscape of opportunities will look like once they do. But instead of worrying about that I'm deciding to focus on leveling up my skills to become even more employable.
In short, I'm learning how to code. I'm taking a beginners course on HTML, CSS and Javascript, made by company called SuperHi. I'm doing this to eventually land a job at a web agency, or wherever a website developer is needed. (My ultimate goal would be to work for WP Buffs as a technician, but don't tell them)
I think I have a good foundation to pick up the skill. I have a lot of experience with WordPress and page builders, and I'm pretty familiar with how HTML and CSS behave.
Plus it also helps that I found such a great resource in SuperHi. It's so great. Maybe I'll write a full review after I'm done.
I recently challenged myself to run 5 miles every day for 30 days. This is not easy for me. I usually only run 5 miles when I’m with my running club. When I’m alone, I rarely run more than 3. Now I’m doing more than that, AND consecutively? So yeah, this challenge is a pretty scary thing.
I honestly don’t know if I’ll be able to do it. But I’m doing this for exactly that reason. I love taking on challenges that seem outside my reach.
That, and also because I want to regain my sense of purpose when it comes to running. I once gave myself the challenge to run every day for at least one mile. I ended up with a 150 day streak. I miss having a purpose to my running, no matter how arbitrary.
As I’m writing this, I just got done with my 5th day. I actually feel great about my chances of succeeding. I feel like the only thing that can stop me is an injury.
Wish me luck. If you want to follow my journey, add me on Instagram or on Strava.
Update 8/1/19 : well, I completed the challenge. This gave me the confidence to register for a 50k race. This will be my first ultramarathon. Wish me luck, again.
The thoughts that go on inside your brain are complex and nuanced. So much so that they don’t belong in the real world. To take them out to the real world, you have to re-package them with limiting tools — i.e., language and your ability to wield it. This inevitably leaves out some of the meaning behind your original thought. And it’s often forgotten.
I believe everyone has interesting thoughts daily. Thoughts that are relatively unique. And perhaps helpful, if only they are able to capture them intact.
The problem is that the more you allow these elusive thoughts to slip by, the less you start to notice them. They become white noise.
The skill of capturing and articulating your thoughts has asymmetrical benefits. Both in your personal and professional life. Not to mention it makes you so much more interesting. It’s like there’s a superpower inside of you and it’s waiting to be ignited.
To ignite it, you have to make it a habit to write down your thoughts. Practice getting on paper what is in your mind. Over time you’ll get better and better at articulating it. Understand that it’ll never be an exact copy.
The authors and speakers you admire don’t have a special talent, they just had tons of practice doing this.
This idea was inspired while listening to this amazing speech by David Foster Wallace. His ability to articulate his thoughts is unparalleled.
I recently got the chance to visit Mexico for the first time in 15 years. This is the place where I was born, and where I spent the first 10 years of my life. As you can imagine, I was very emotional during this trip.
To get reacquainted with the places and people that used to be part of my life was such a special experience. So many thoughts and emotions (both negative and positive) finally resurfaced. It was overwhelming. Throughout all of this, there was one question on my mind, a question that has been bugging me ever since I set foot in America: was it worth it? Was moving to the US worth leaving behind everything I cherished at the time?
That’s what I’d like to explore with this post.
I remember very clearly the day I left Mexico. I remember because I desperately didn’t want to go. I didn’t want to be far away from everything I cherished: my extended family whom I was very close with, my neighborhood which was filled with kids to play with, the Sunday gatherings with my dad’s side of the family, and more.
That night when I arrived in Minnesota, I remember crying myself to sleep. And many nights after that. In those early days, I would have done anything to go back.
But as time passed, I slowly became numb to that desire. I started to forget what Mexico meant to me. Call it a coping mechanism. I also grew accustomed to my new environment and culture. So much so that I eventually started saying “no” to the question, “would you like to go back to Mexico?” I guess I stopped valuing the things I used to value. My 10 year-old self would be very sad about this. And for a long time I felt a great amount of guilt for it.
It’s clear that I’m not the same person I would have been if my parents never took me here. Whether that’s for better or for worse I honestly don’t know. If I stayed, would I still gain an interest in philosophy, or would I be less of a critical thinker? Would I be the shy person that I am today, or would I be more outgoing? Would I still believe in the importance of peaceful parenting, or would I have continued the tradition of threats and violence once I have kids? It’s hard to say whether these things that are core to who I am today would still be here.
Then there’s the question of what kinds of opportunities and freedoms I would or wouldn’t have if I had stayed in Mexico. I think it is safe to say that in those terms I’m better off in America. However, I wouldn’t say it’s by that much. In fact, this visit opened my eyes to the fact that Mexico wasn’t the underdeveloped country I previously thought it was. I was actually surprised at how modern the cities were and how much flourishing is going on.
By the way, I highly recommend visiting Monterrey — the combination of skyscrapers and mountains make for such a beautiful city. I definitely wouldn’t mind living there.
Sure, there may be more poverty in Mexico, and you do have to be more vigilant, but when I look at the lives that my cousins lead, it is honestly not that bad. In many cases it’s indistinguishable from life in America. As I got to know them, it’s clear that they have a great life ahead of them — one with plenty of opportunities, but more importantly, a great family that they love.
Before this trip I would have said that I was better off living in the US, but after seeing my cousins, and seeing how happy they are to be surrounded by their family, I’m not so sure anymore. If I had to answer the question right now, I’d say that losing the relationship I had with my family was not worth it. And then there’s the fact that I lost the opportunity to see certain family members again before they passed away, something I deeply regret.
I feel sad about the many things I missed out on as a result of my parent’s decision to move and stay in America. No doubt this has shaped me into someone that’s more reserved. But I am happy for the things I’ve learned and the values I hold as a result of this journey. I guess it’s bittersweet. It may not have been worth it in my opinion, but I guess all I can do is make the best of it so that it wasn’t all for nothing.
Being around successful people is empowering. It causes you to expand your idea of how far you can reach. This is why I believe growing up in big cities — specifically places with a high concentration of successful people and an abundance of opportunities — can be a huge boost.
I often hear the quote, “you are the average of the 5 people you spend the most time with.” I couldn’t agree with it more.
I wasn’t around many successful people growing up. In fact, I was around people who were the opposite of successful. As a result, I had a hard time believing I was capable of much.
I’m barely waking up to my potential and it’s largely thanks to podcasts.
Through the medium I’ve been able to fill the hole that my immediate environment neglects. Thanks to podcasts, I’ve been in the room with hundreds (if not thousands) of highly successful people in the startup world. This has expanded my idea of what I’m capable of.
Even if I never reach their level of success, I will still go further than I previously thought possible.
Podcasts are so awesome.
How many chapters have gone unread because I didn’t want to take on the whole book?
How many days of exercise have I skipped because I didn’t want to drain myself completely?
How many blog posts have gone unwritten because I didn’t have a neat conclusion?
I bet if I wasn’t determined to have conventional standards from the start, I would learn and grow a lot faster.
Every NBA fan has their favorite player to root for. Usually it’s a top 10 player, or whoever happens to be the best player on their favorite team. While I do enjoy watching some of the best scorers like James Harden or Steph Curry, lately I’ve grown fond of one lesser known player: T.J. McConnell, the undrafted guard from the 76ers.
Averaging about 7 points, 2 rebounds and 4 assists from the bench, T.J. is far from an elite player (at least for the time being). But what makes him valuable — and the reason why I like him so much — is that he is a hard working player with a contagious spirit.
He first came into my radar during the 2017-2018 season, when the Sixers became my go-to team to watch. I noticed how competitive he was. And let’s face it, when you are as athletically disadvantaged like him, you have no choice but to give your all in every game.
Even when he’s on the bench, he’s always visibly enthusiastic over his teammates’ successes, which makes him a source of energy for the team.
But he’s not just a great teammate; he is also a favorite among Philadelphians. During home games, you can hear fans get especially excited whenever he scores or makes great plays.
The reason why I like him is that he has such a great underdog story. After college, he could have easily believed that he wasn’t cut out for the NBA and that would have been the end of it. But instead he believed in himself. And even though he wasn’t drafted he still found a coach to take a chance on him. Not only did he make it in a team, but he was able to have good minutes. Against all odds, he found his niche.
It’s amazing to see his fearlessness in the face of bigger, more athletic players. For me, he is a constant reminder that confidence goes a long way.
I hope he has long NBA career. Either way, I’ll be rooting for him along the way.
To learn more about his story and how much he had to overcome to get to where he is, I recommend this great interview from The JJ Redick Podcast.
One of the many things wrong with the education system is that it doesn’t give kids the time to master anything. What we do instead is teach them a little about a lot of different subjects. And I’m using the word “teach” loosely here, since kids don’t retain most of the information.
Schools have this “jack of all trades” method where kids are given 1 hour periods to focus and they are made to juggle 5-7 completely different subjects, most of which are not interesting to them.
If you ask me, that sounds like a recipe for creating mediocre people.
This education system doesn’t even allow them to specialize until they’re deep into college!
That method flies in the face of how we actually learn.
It is mastering one thing that sets us up to succeed in other areas. It teaches us how to think and how to stick through difficult things. It gives us confidence in ourselves to master anything we set our minds to.
Though it may seem counterintuitive, focusing on one thing for a long period of time gets us further than focusing on a lot of things for a short period of time.
Oh, and as a bonus, it also makes for more interesting people!
This post was inspired by this amazing interview of Adam Robinson on The Knowledge Project
Schools have taught us that neatly defined paths are the only ones worth taking. That there’s only one way to learn. That you have to wait for orders before you can even think about creating something. That you have to study before you take action. That you can’t delve into a subject seriously unless you are getting a credential for it.
That may be true while you’re in school. Outside of school however, there’s only two things that really matter: that you find value in whatever you do or that others find value in whatever you do.
However you can fulfill that is all fair game.
If my goal for the day is to run two miles, I feel exhausted by the time I finish. If my goal is to run four miles, I don’t feel exhausted at two.
This reveals to me that it’s all about the mindset. Obviously I’m physically doing the same amount of exercise by the time I finish two, so I believe that the difference is in my expectation.
My brain is constantly looking for an excuse to stop pain. If it is convinced that the pain will not stop at 2 then it’ll do whatever necessary to cope. And it copes by telling itself that this pain is normal. But if it knows I will stop soon, it will stop trying to cope.
Lesson: whatever your goal is, always aim a few notches above it because it’ll give you the mindset of a person who sees the original goal as normal.
Sometimes we don’t experience the result of being diligent as a reward. This is unfortunate because it means we have poor incentives to do what’s best for us.
What do I mean?
Well, take driving for example.
Let’s say you drive completely safe — no unnecessary lane changes, no speeding etc.
So what is the reward for doing that? The reward is that nothing bad happens. Your life goes on as it always has, which is something you already take for granted.
From an intellectual perspective you can see the value of driving safe, but still the result of driving safe doesn’t feel like a reward. It takes a good amount of imagination to be able to see the alternate scenario where you weren’t as careful.
I remember when I discovered podcasts as a medium. One summer day in 2009, I found that the iTunes store had a category called podcasts. It was content that I could download for free! I thought that was amazing.
I was very excited by the possibilities. Podcasts were a window to anything I wanted to learn. It was not limited by a place, time or a generic set of subjects. It was a medium that truly gave me the freedom to learn.
Notice that I made this discovery during the summer, when I had time to explore.
First, I listened to podcasts about comedy and unsolved mysteries (ghosts, aliens, Big Foot, Mothman etc.). My favorite two podcasts were Comedy Death Ray (now called Comedy Bang! Bang!) and one called Universe of Mystery. Then I slowly moved towards more intellectual stuff like The Joe Rogan Experience, Stefan Molyneux’s Freedomain Radio and Dan Carlin’s Common Sense.
This was happening while I was juggling school. At the time I thought of school as a necessary burden, but now I realize how useless it was in terms of shaping my future for the better. I would echo George Bernard Shaw's experience when he said,
From a very early age, I've had to interrupt my education to go to school.
Flashforward 9 years since I found the magical world of podcasts. Now, almost everything I've learned that has made a tangible impact in my life has come from them.
To show you what I mean, here are just a few life-altering things that happened because of podcasts:
These are clear learning moments I can point to that have broadened my horizons. I think it's safe to say that most of the meaningful knowledge I've acquired has come from the podcasts that I've listened to, not from school. When you compare the amount of time I've spent listening to podcasts to the 15,000+ hours which school had me for, plus a few years in college, this should bring some alarm.
Maybe other people were different. Maybe they actually learned some meaningful things in school, but even then I think there remains a problem. And that problem is that schools are inherently inefficient at cultivating meaningful learning.
I have many concerns with Jordan B. Peterson's advice on parenting. Going into his book, I already knew that my views on the matter differed, but I didn't expect it to be by such a wide margin.
Full disclosure: I have little experience with children. However, studying how one can best raise children has been a focus of mine for more than 5 years. I partly pursue this because it's a great form of self-therapy and partly because I want to eventually use what I learn to be the best parent I can be (if I ever become one).
It's also worth noting that I was once a child and I've spent a lot of time trying to make sense of that time. Because of this, I think I can bring a special, though by no means complete, perspective on the subject.
In his book, particularly chapter 5, JBP promotes the use of behaviorism on children. To be clear, this is a parenting style that is already the norm. Everyone I know was raised with this method, including me. Most parents do use rewards and punishments to get children to behave and to "teach" them to stay out of danger. Under threat, they are made to say please and thank you, share with others, be quiet in public etc. Almost all schools use rewards and punishments too.
With this method, the reason why children do the actions you wish to see does not matter. What matters is that they appear to emulate good behavior.
What Peterson seems to be going for is a refinement of behaviorism, but I think that's a very low bar to aim for. Aim higher, Peterson! I think there is an even better method altogether, a method that exists outside the paradigm of manipulation. I'm talking about parenting with Nonviolent Communication (or NVC). In short, this is a method that views the parent/child relationship as a partnership rather than a perpetual fight for dominance. Kind of like any truly healthy relationship. With this method, it is understood that connection, rather than manipulation, is the best path to get our needs met in the long-term.
Side note: I'd also refer to this approach as peaceful parenting, attachment parenting, or parenting with an unschooling philosophy.
In chapter 5, JBP presents many false dichotomies of how you can treat children:
I don't think he's aware that these are false dichotomies. It's likely that he, like most other people, just doesn't know that there are other possibilities. I think this is because he has been blinded by the language that our society uses. His religious beliefs probably also have something to do with it. After all, his convictions align well with the idea of original sin and "spare the rod, spoil the child."
JBP generally sees people through the lens of good and bad. He says everyone has the potential of being bad and extends that ability to children, saying that it is naive and dangerous to not see them this way. Well, call me naive if you want but I don't see anybody that way. Not because I think it's impossible for people to do evil things, but because I think it's counterproductive to see people through that lens. This is especially true for people with whom you want to be in a long-term relationship with. I'd say that such moralistic judgments can only impede the possibility of getting our needs met.
Marshall B. Rosenberg, author of Nonviolent Communication wrote:
"It is my belief that all such analyses of other human beings are tragic expressions of our own needs. They are tragic because when we express our values and needs in this form, we increase defensiveness and resistance among the very people whose behaviors are of concern to us."
I would echo Rosenberg's statement because I've personally experienced it both as a child and as an adult. I think the logic of it is pretty much universal; just think of the last time you felt your whole character being judged. Think of when you were called bad, annoying, inconsiderate etc. Did it make you want to understand and accommodate the person more, or less?
Another thing is that, since children are both defenseless and reliant on you for information, they might start to believe in the negative, one-dimensional labels that you put on them, making it harder for them to grow out of the very habits you don't like.
Instead of jumping the gun on moralistic judgments, what if you directly expressed what you felt and needed? Isn't that more likely to get results? Granted, using NVC will not always get you the result that you desire, but my point is that making moralistic judgments will never do you any better.
Throughout this chapter and several other talks, Peterson uses many uncharitable labels on children. He has called them names like "little monsters," "rats," "devils," "brats," "blighters," and "varmint." To me, this is horrifying. He probably doesn't say those words to them directly, but there's no doubt that it shapes his attitude towards them.
That is what Rosenberg would call "life-alienating language." It is a language which instills the idea that the other is less than human and therefore less deserving of empathy and compassion. It gives us the green light to implement behaviorism on kids as if they were no different than rats.
In the chapter, when JBP was trying to get a child to eat, he likened it to a war. When I read this, it reminded me of George Lakeloff and Mark Johnson's book, Metaphors We Live By. In it, they argued that the metaphors we use determine how we live our lives. There's a relevant passage where they talk about arguments, which I think could also apply to our interactions with children:
It is important to see that we don't just talk about arguments in terms of war. We can actually win or lose arguments. We see the person we are arguing with as an opponent. We attack his positions and we defend our own. We gain and lose ground. We plan and use strategies. If we find a position indefensible, we can abandon it and take a new line of attack. Many of the things we do in arguing are partially structured by the concept of war. Though there is no physical battle, there is a verbal battle, and the structure of an argument—attack, defense, counter-attack, etc.—reflects this. It is in this sense that the ARGUMENT IS WAR metaphor is one that we live by in this culture; it structures the actions we perform in arguing.
Try to imagine a culture where arguments are not viewed in terms of war, where no one wins or loses, where there is no sense of attacking or defending, gaining or losing ground. Imagine a culture where an argument is viewed as a dance, the participants are seen as performers, and the goal is to perform in a balanced and aesthetically pleasing way. In such a culture, people would view arguments differently, experience them differently, carry them out differently, and talk about them differently.
Imagine how much more fruitful every debate would be if we did that.
Just like the "argument is war" metaphor, I believe thinking of a child as an opponent whom you must dominate causes unnecessary friction and stagnates progress. It prevents us from discovering amazing possibilities in parenting.
Now, it is true that because of the immense power disparity of the relationship, parents can just ignore this mombo jumbo and force a child to do pretty much anything on command (unless they have a very strong-willed child, that is). Other than it being morally reprehensible to abuse such power, I want to warn people that it is likely to cause many long-term consequences. Consequences which JBP does not address.
Jordan Peterson was very good at showing the potential horrors of permissive parenting (something I'm not advocating for, it's just the only alternative that he offers) but he didn't present any potential horrors of behaviorism. So I think I'll do that.
Here are some of the negative consequences that can come out of behaviorism. For more detailed explanations, plus the evidence to back them up, I'd recommend Alfie Kohn's books, Punished by Rewards and Unconditional Parenting.
It neglects intrinsic motivation. Behaviorism is like a trainer lifting your arm while you hold a dumbbell and calling it exercise. Since they are being made to do things under threat of punishment or promise of reward, children are denied the opportunity to have their actions be their own. What do you think will happen when the external motivation isn't there anymore? Do you think the child will still behave? I don't think so. With behaviorism, children never truly learn discipline or to be good. (Can a person who is forced to "be good" actually be good anyway?) They simply haven't utilized their internal motivation when they do those things.
I wrote something that exemplifies this in a post called The Problem With Making Kids Say “Thank You”
It makes them reliant on behaviorism. Sometimes when you coerce a child to behave a certain way it does end up sticking, but it comes at the cost of making them dependent on external pressure. You can see this in people who promise themselves a treat if they do something good or go down a path of self-loathing if they fail. They are conditioned to need external motivation to be good or to have discipline.
Coercing them may make them hate the very thing you want them to do. I think this is self-explanatory.
Depression. One of the most important requirements for happiness is a sense of autonomy. With behaviorism, children grow up to act based on pressure rather than a real sense of choice. We need the ability to choose our own actions and goals. When your behavior is being controlled by your parents and school, you are being denied the opportunity to pursue your own goals let alone ever find out what they are. If children are raised on behaviorism, their joy comes from other people's approval. And even then, it's a short-lived kind of joy.
I know Peterson doesn't think happiness is a worthwhile goal, but it's also worth noting that depression impedes people from reaching even a goal that Peterson would approve of, so he shouldn't perpetuate it if he can help it.
It forces them to prioritize appeasing authority over learning about and conquering reality. Under behaviorism, kids have no reason to care about the behavior you want them to do, but they have all the reason care about getting the reward and avoiding the punishment. When they are made to suffer for misbehaving, they don't learn that such behavior is wrong or dangerous, rather they learn that displeasing the parent is wrong or dangerous. Therefore, they learn to conduct themselves based on the ones who hold the hammer rather than reality. Sometimes it only makes them become more sneaky so as to not get caught.
It erodes the relationship. As you can see from the previous point, it encourages children to be dishonest with the parent. This is where I believe the "rebellious teenage years" come from. When the parent is a source of what's making them suffer, they become another entity that should be avoided. This means that the parents will have less of an influence on their children's lives. Especially when they grow older and the power of rewards and punishments doesn't hold the same effect anymore.
It teaches them to repress their emotions. In chapter 2, Jordan wonders why people care more for others than they do for themselves. I think this is at least partially the answer. Thanks to behaviorism, they are taught that their own emotions and needs are not a priority over the people who hold power. They are taught that their own emotions and needs are to be repressed if they want to live harmoniously with a parent.
I can easily see this leading to collectivism, which ironically is what Jordan is trying to steer people away from.
I know these things can happen because I've experienced them. I was actually one of those defiant children who refused any type of manipulation. Each attempt at controlling me resulted in resistance, which then caused more drastic methods to control me, which resulted in more resistance. I eventually became numb to any type of reward and punishment coming both from my parents and schools. In the process, my relationship with my parents deteriorated and they lost any real influence they had on me. William Glasser nailed my experience when he wrote:
The vast majority of unhappiness [in the parent-child relationship] is the result of well-intentioned parents trying to make children do what they don’t want to do…. Few of us [parents] are prepared to accept that it is our attempts to control that destroys the only thing we have with our children that gives us some [influence] over them, our relationship.
Today, I have a strong drive to be polite and well liked. I'm also on my way to becoming successful by my own standards. I can assure you this didn't come from other people trying to force me to be like this. In reality, I always had a strong need for my values to be intrinsic. I remember having that need back then, though I couldn't have articulated it.
The idea that a parent might interpret the way children express their needs as "malicious" is extremely unfortunate.
I'm barely starting to trust the fact that I have in me the need and ability to become a good human being; that I don't need external control to lead a life of meaning and discipline. This trust in myself could have been instilled in me way earlier if it wasn't for behaviorism.
I know what would have worked better. I know for a fact that my parents would have gotten more of what they wanted out of me if they started from a place of trust and respect rather than fear for my future. I know it's impossible to prove a counterfactual, but after learning about myself and recollecting what was going on inside my head back then, I can say that more compassion and empathy in place of "tough love" would have set me up for a better life, not to mention a better relationship with my parents.
There is so much great content out there that can enlighten us on different ways to handle situations without behaviorism. Here are just some of them to get you started.
This is a great conference talk by Roslyn Ross, where she explains why behaviorism leads to collectivism and some solutions
I'd also recommend Roslyn's blog.
Unruffled by Janet Lansbury. This is a podcast where Landsbury answers questions about specific situations. In there, you can find a peaceful solution to every situation Jordan Peterson gave an example of: how to deal with children that don't want to sleep/eat or when they hit etc.
Here's a pertinent episode: Stop Making Mealtime A Challenge. I think you'd be interested in comparing it to Jordan Peterson's forceful approach.
Lastly, I highly recommend Nonviolent Communication by Marshall Rosenberg. This book gives you a better way of getting what you want without using rewards and threats, which, in my opinion, is not very effective in the first place.
Peaceful alternatives are out there. Using rewards and punishments necessarily limits our ability to find better solutions. Even Jordan Peterson would agree that restrictions lead to creativity, so let's follow this wisdom and restrict our ability to approach kids with behaviorism. If you do this I think you'd be surprised by the possibilities.
P.S. If you want to hear other counterpoints to Jordan's parenting approach I 'd like to direct you to this episode of The Voluntary Life. Jake Desyllas has great points that I just can't fit in this post.
On March 20, I challenged myself to run at least 1 mile a day for 30 days and decided to document it on my Instagram. I started this challenge because I wanted to develop discipline and prove to myself that I could accomplish a long-term goal. After 30 days I didn't want to stop so I told myself I'd do 60, then 100.
At this point, I don't know when I'll stop, but what I do know is that I've benefited so much already. I feel that I've grown in this period of time at a faster rate than ever before. Well, maybe I grew at a faster rate when I was a toddler. For example, I went from crawling to walking in just one day. Now that's a really big improvement in life if you ask me.
Anyway, here are the cool insights I've gathered by running a mile every day for 100 days straight.
I know it seems like this should be obvious but let me tell you, it wasn't obvious after the 30th or even the 60th day. There were lots of days when I did the bare minimum and wondered if 1 mile would ever feel like a piece of cake. Now I can say that it does feel that way more often than not. Don't get me wrong, there are still days when I reeeeaally don't feel like running, but once I get out there that feeling usually goes away and I'm done before I know it.
Without any rest days, I thought I'd be exhausted by now, or that my legs would wear down, but that couldn't be further from the truth. In fact, I was recently able to run 13 miles (my longest run yet) and in two days I was ready to go hard at it again. No soreness whatsoever.
Of course, this can only happen if I take care of my body, which gets me to my next point.
I drink water now! Hooray!
Before this challenge, I sometimes went days without drinking any water. Now I can't afford to do that, so it doesn't happen anymore.
I know that if I eat chips or drink soda, I will soon feel weak and not have the necessary energy to do a long run. I had to go through a few runs where a felt extremely weak before I learned that lesson.
Because I work on my body constantly, I simply don't feel okay with mistreating it anymore.
Side note: I've found that I get great results if my pre-run meal is just a protein shake. It sits a lot lighter in my stomach and gives me long-lasting energy. I especially like a vanilla protein powder and a banana mixed in with coconut milk.
If you told me I would learn to love running a few months ago, I wouldn't believe you. I just couldn't fathom liking something that brought so much discomfort. In fact, I still can't fully understand it; I just merely feel it.
I started running almost a year ago but I only did it for health, not for fun. Now, the health part is just a bonus.
Before I started this challenge, I would dread the days when I've committed myself to run more than the minimum. Like when I ran with my local running club, for example. Now I have no fear of that inevitable pain. And during the runs, I don't constantly wish for the pain to end.
Because of this challenge I learned to be okay with being uncomfortable.
There's no denying it: a daily dose of accomplishment does wonders to your psyche.
Every day I have accomplished a goal I set for myself, thus increasing my confidence to accomplish things. Running every day has changed the way I approach new goals, tasks and challanges. I'm now more of an optimist and risk taker.
A case in point is when I took the initiative to create a website for my local running club even though I had no coding knowledge. I don't think my past self would have done that.
Most people have a rather flexible definition of love, which renders the word meaningless. For example, they say they love their respectful and honest partner while at the same time loving their disrespectful and abusive parents. Or maybe they say they love their child while treating them like he's less than human by beating them, lying to them, or being emotionally abusive.
From my perspective, love necessarily includes respect. It involves a commitment to being as honest and understanding as possible. You can have your own definition of love, but whatever it is, I suggest you define it well. And stick to it.
If you love someone who treats you badly and at the same time you love someone who treats you with respect, then I think you have a problem. You either have to define one as a different kind of love or stop saying that you love one of those people.
But why fix this contradiction, you may ask.
For one, it is insulting to the person who treats you one way to say that you love them in the same way that you love a person that treats you the opposite. If that person is smart enough, they will notice that you have a screwed up view of love, and will not give too much weight to your words. If they're even smarter, they would avoid being in a relationship with you in the first place.
If the person is completely okay with your loose definition of love, then watch out. It may mean that they are looking to take advantage of you since they know that you will still love them anyway.
If your definition of love is loose enough to include disrespect and abuse, you will run the danger of inviting disrespectful and abusive people into your life and repelling good people out of it.
Alternatively, you may end up inviting your own disrespect and abuse towards the people who you claim to love.
I remember exactly when I became keen on the importance of analyzing my past. It was when I was 18, just beginning my first year of college. I was listening to a podcast while I waited for my next class. The podcast was just a regular conversation between two intellectuals, but they touched on something very relevant to me. That "something" was the psychological effects of growing up in a fatherless home.
As they described the ramifications, which were based on studies, I felt as if they were describing ME. I was floored. "How could they know me so well?" I thought.
Because of this conversation, I learned that growing up fatherless greatly contributed to my low self-esteem, social anxiety, and depression. I didn't even need to look at the studies - once I made the connection, it made perfect sense. I just needed someone to point it out for me.
The truth was that my father's absence created a deep feeling of unworthiness. This is a big reason why I was never able to form long-lasting relationships and why I did so much to sabotage my life.
The most important thing that I learned is that I couldn't possibly expect these issues to disappear without doing a lot of introspection first. Because to permanently fix an issue, you have to understand where it came from in the first place.
Looking back on this realization, it is really surprising how I didn't know something so simple. Before this, I was not aware of the factors that contributed to my issues. I knew that there were factors, but when it came to articulating them, I was completely lost. I was never given the mental tools to decipher them.
Come to think of it, I remember consciously thinking that I was strong enough to be unaffected by the fact that my father left me. I was even proud of the fact that I never cried over it. I now realize I was being delusional. Gowing up fatherless did have a huge effect on me and being ignorant of the fact only prevented me from removing (or at least mitigating) that effect.
How has the importance of looking at my past eluded me for so long? Why didn't my school or family teach me this? If the knowledge of the damaging effects of fatherlessness was kept from me, then what else?
Children a) are powerless and b) don't yet have all the mental tools to express their feelings and needs effectively. (Though I'm afraid ""b"" is not exclusive to kids)
Instead of assuming ""bad behavior"" or ""disrespect"" or ""he's trying to dominate me"" whenever children do something they don't like, parents should assume ""they don't know better ways to express themselves yet"" or ""they haven't had enough practice.""
The former interpretation will cause anger and an attempt (often in the form of punishment) to repress the child's present and future attempts at self-expression. The latter will allow the parent to react compassionately and actually teach the child better tools of self-expression.
I guarantee parents will have better results doing it that way. It will also create mentally healthy adults who DO know how to express themselves effectively.
Children need guidance, not punishments.
Since I'm so interested in peaceful parenting and unschooling, I thought I should take the time to think about it and write down what those terms mean to me. Sometimes I interchange the two which may cause some confusion, but that's because I do take them to mean the same thing. I'll explain.
PEACEFUL PARENTING
On the surface, peaceful parenting may seem like it's just about refraining to physically harm children, but it actually goes beyond that. Peaceful parenting is about respecting a child's dignity and sense of self. This means treating them without judging, shaming, bribing, intimidating or any other form of coercion.
Instead of looking at the parent/child relationship as a struggle for power, peaceful parenting allows us to look at it as two individuals who can work together to get their needs met. Now, usually when I say this I get the response that I advocate being a submissive parent. But that's not the case.
For an excellent explanation for how peaceful parenting works I recommend you watch the video below. I time-stamped the relevant part, but if you have the time I highly recommend watching the whole thing!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-8JDpT1mSM
UNSCHOOLING
The central part about unschooling is to refrain from sending your children to school against their will. It is different from traditional homeschooling in that there is no enforced curriculum by the parent. Instead, it's the child who makes the decision on what he/she wants to learn. While unschooling, it is the job of the parent to pay close attention to the child's interests and to facilitate their learning experience with emotional support and resources.
Unschooling recognizes that schools in general damage the child's natural creativity and love for learning about the world.
WHY THEY'RE THE SAME
Just like peaceful parenting, unschooling comes with the recognition that children are their own individuals who deserve just as much respect as any other person. You can't have unschooling without peaceful parenting.
The reason why I think of those two terms as the same thing is because unschooling is basically peaceful parenting taken to its logical conclusion. Afer all, I don't consider it peaceful to force a kid to go to school and learn things that he is not interested in.
I know there are conscious peaceful parents out there who still send their kids to school against their will, but I think they are being inconsistent with their philosophy. Maybe they fear that their child will not learn important things, or maybe they don't have the necessary time and resources required. If it's the former I'd encourage them to take a look at the thousands of now adults who were unschooled who managed to do just fine in the real world. If it's the latter, it's perfectly understandable. As long as they recognize the inconsistency and try to mitigate the negative effects of compulsory schooling.
I think being shy can have some tragic implications. And this is coming from someone who is shy.
To understand the implications lets first define what it means to be shy. I'm defining shyness as being fearful of expressing yourself around others. This does not include introverts, provided that they aren't timid or nervous when they are with company. Introverts can be shy but not all are.
I happen to be both - for the most part, I like to be alone, but when I'm with others fear does prevent me from expressing myself properly. Because of this fear I have held back many moments of self expression. Basically everything that makes life worth living.
In short, I have refrained from expressing myself for fear of facing punishment.
So where does this fear come from? I believe that shy people were once sensitive children who developed this fear as a result of past traumatic occurrences.
Though shy people may not have a present reason to be timid, they once did. Shy people were once in an environment where, to some degree or another, it was dangerous to be fully themselves. This danger can come in many ways and from many people including parents, siblings, teachers or school bullies.
Perhaps, like me, these shy people had their curiosity squashed, their propensity for being playful and loud tamed, their feelings exploited, or their unique quirks ridiculed. Whatever it was, I guarantee that they had an expression that was natural to them that others around them didn't like and so, much like a nail that sticks out, they got the hammer.
Pretty soon they learned that not all of who they are is accepted, so they start to suppress their true selves in order to survive. But the problem never stops there; this self-censorship is then internalized. It stays with them as they grow, even when there's no possibility of retaliation. What was once a necessary adjustment in response to their environment has now turned into unresolved trauma.
Now you understand why I think this is tragic. It's almost even more tragic that there are people out there who think shyness is just part of their natural personality rather than a result of the trauma-inducing environment around them. Without this knowledge, they have little chance of ever reversing it.
I remember being outgoing and carefree once. I believe basically every person was born that way. It is not until they get tested, silenced, controlled, humiliated, scorned, and beaten that they become anxious and reserved. One of my goals in life is to reconnect with who I was before that happened.
If I asked parents what is the number one thing they want for their children, I bet most of them would say happiness. Some may have a roundabout way of saying it, for example they may say they want them to have a nice career or a spouse and kids, but that's because they think those achievements will lead to happiness. Either way you can boil it down to parents want their kids to have a happy and fulfilling life.
Despite the fact that this is their goal, a lot of parents end up failing at helping their kids attain happiness. Why is that? Well I think for most cases the answer is simple: the parents aren't happy themselves. This is a classic case of the blind leading the blind.
If you can't figure out how to be happy how the hell can you figure out how to make another human happy? You know yourself better than your kid after all.
Children can tell if you are not happy, and so they know where your guidance will lead to if they follow it - it will lead to your life. So if you don't seem happy the rational thing to do is to not listen to you. I believe this is why kids become rebellious when they grow up. You simply don't have valid authority. They know that you are bullshitting when you promise them a great life if only they do what you say, and you'd be surprised how young they catch on.
I know that true happiness is hard to attain, especially if you don't have guidance from happy people. I don't yet have an answer for how to attain it for myself except that it has a lot to do with freedom. I also know about what doesn't work and one of those things is letting myself be controlled by, let alone listen to people that aren't happy themselves, whether they be my parents, school teachers or society as a whole.
I think it is crucial for any aspiring parent to find the answer for themselves before a child shows up. That is if they want said child to be happy.
In the world of philosophy, there is a huge debate between determinism and free will. The former says that our actions are determined by our past while the latter says that our actions can be chosen freely.
I have nowhere near the amount of knowledge and wisdom to say which one is right. What I will say is that it would behoove us to act as if we did have full free will, even if it isn't true.
That's because belief in determinism usually leads to inaction. Even though they may not know it, some people invoke determinism as an excuse to not improve their lives. You can see this with how they deflect personal responsibility: They may say "I was just raised this way" or "I couldn't get it done because of this other person."
That may be true - and it may actually be important to be aware of those causes - but what is more important is what you're going to do about it.
Another problem with people that believe in determinism is that they fundamentally don't believe they can choose to change. Instead they wait for "the universe" to tell them when it's time for a change. They usually wait until they get a big health scare to start exercising or they wait until they get into a car crash to start driving more responsibly. Sometimes it may be too late.
Imagine how much better it would be if those people knew they could change their bad habit before a defining moment?
What we need to do, if we want to improve our lives, is to act as if we have full and unfettered free will.
I think nearly all of the world's problems wouldn't exist in the first place if everyone was able to perfectly communicate and interpret each other's thoughts and feelings accurately. Language barriers, misinterpretations, presupposed narratives, a lacking vocabulary, all contribute to most, if not all conflicts. Just look at almost any movie (especially romantic movies) - most of the problems in them could easily have been prevented if people just talked to each other properly.
I think good communication skills are often the determining factor of whether a relationship is doomed to fail or not. I've seen firsthand how relationships slowly deteriorate because of a deficiency in communication skills. That includes some of my own relationships with my Spanish speaking family. Although I do speak Spanish, my vocabulary is not complex enough for me to be able to properly say what I mean.
Not being able to speak my mind is one of my biggest fears. To me, it is a personal hell to live a life where you're never fully understood. This is why I admire authors and public speakers. They are able to express themselves the way that they want to, or at least to a better degree than the average person. Getting to that level is something I strive to do. This is a huge reason for why I'm blogging. Practice makes perfect.
The ability to delay gratification, or patience, is one of the most valuable qualities a person could have. Especially when it comes to endeavors that take years before seeing rewards. For example, it is needed to become a doctor, write a book, learn a new language, loose weight etc.
Patience is a prerequisite for doing anything great.
Patience is what differentiates successful business owners and not-so-successful ones. That's because if you try to get as much money as possible as soon as possible, you are not focusing on what you should be focusing on, which is to build a solid foundation that will make your company last.
Patience does not come easy to me.
I became hyper-aware of this fact ever since I started my project, which was an affiliate website. With this site, I have struggled to do the things that don't get immediate results but are crucial for the long term success of the site.
Namely, I have neglected the fact that I should fill the site with interest pieces. Those are articles that don't make money directly but make the site as a whole more interesting and trustworthy. Such value is harder to see and more delayed. But it is very important for any website to have that in order for it to survive long-term.
The reason why it's not that easy to just go for the long term benefits is because of my scarcity mindset. I think 'if I don't take the money now, I may not get any at all in the future because some sort of disruption may occur in the market.'
While those may be legitimate fears, I shouldn't put too much weight in them. Besides, I know that the people that are most successful are the ones that are strong enough to not take the money.
Patience is very important if I want to be successful with anything. So right now I'm doing everything I can to strengthen that muscle.
Most schools and parents do a huge disservice to kids. Whether implicitly or explicitly, they tell them to look for permission from authority figures before doing what they want. Anything from going to the bathroom to studying what they really want to study. This creates young adults who wait for other people to tell them when they're ready to do something.
As a result there are college students waiting to get a certificate before creating anything. They think they need to get an English degree before writing for the public or a Business degree before starting their own business.
Stop waiting to be "qualified" - you can take action now. The only permission you need is from yourself. This is something I wish I knew when I was younger.
I love running.
I love it because of how clear a metaphor it is for so many aspects of life. It's one of the simplest ways to teach yourself how to become a better person. For example, the experience of pushing yourself after you think you have nothing left is something you can transfer in your work or relationships.
Running has taught me a lot about myself, including the fact that I am capable of more than I previously thought. Just when I thought I couldn't run any longer, I somehow found a way to keep going. (mostly with the help of running with other people)
It turns out that whenever I feel like stopping, I usually have more than a few miles left in me. Thinking that I couldn't keep going was all in my head. I had a self imposed limitation that wasn't reflective of reality. The cool thing is that the more you push yourself the more you realize that you don't know where your own limit is.
If this is true for running, where else is it true? That is an exciting question to wonder about.
How much of your time do you spend thinking about politics?
Me? I'm ashamed to say how much time I spent listening to political podcasts and YouTube channels in the past few years. I thought it would make me a respectable person who could hold conversations at cocktail parties. But I was just kidding myself - I don't even like drinking.
For some time I actually thought having that type of knowledge was important. I often agreed when people said that "the government affects you whether you like it or not so you better pay attention to it" and "the world would be a better place if more people got involved in politics."
I now think paying attention to politics is a waste of time and mental energy, especially when you think about the opportunity cost.
I can say for a fact that my reality would have been the same, if not a lot better, had I never payed any attention to politics. In other words, if I never knew what's going on in the Middle East or even who is my current president, my life would have been no worse. I simply don't think those facts will ever become useful in my life other than for trivial purposes.
Sure that information may convey that something bad is going on, but it does me no good to know them. Just like it does me no good to know that a dog just got run over a couple blocks from me. It's a huge bummer, but there's nothing I can do and therefore no reason to know. In fact, it would have been better to not be aware of the k-9's tragedy because knowing such a thing only makes me depressed and unfocused. That's a net-negative for society.
Even if knowing a little bit about what's going on at the national level can be useful, shouldn't it be proportionate to your control over it? For example, spending 20% of your time learning about what's going on in politics is irrational if you have an almost-non-existent power to do something impactful with it.
While it may be important to be aware of the government's laws and policies at a basic level, very quickly we run into diminishing returns. That point is when we watch the news like a drama show every day and keep up with the president's tweets.
I don't know about you, but I've noticed that the people that pay the most attention to politics have less control over their emotions. You can see this with the people that went out of their minds when Trump won because they thought the world was coming to an end. Their mood is beholden to the political climate.
The thought of paying attention to what Trump is up to and getting mad over it is just absurd. There's nothing the average citizen could do. Voting comes every 4 years and even then your vote has virtually no impact. So just stop wasting your time and focus on things you do have control over.
If anything, elections makes people more passive: it fools them into thinking that they're making a difference in the world just by voting.
Young people (particularly college students) are the ones who should ignore politics the most. They still have a lot to improve about themselves before they spend (in my opinion waste) so much of their time trying to save the world through politics. As Jordan Peterson would say, "they need to sort themselves out first."
People should measure all of the time and emotional energy used on arguing and fretting over politics and compare it to the actual impact that they have had with it. I think if they did that, most would immediately give up on politics and take on a more cost effective endeavor for themselves such as bettering their immediate environment. If everyone did that I believe the world would truly be a better place.
I don't mean to sound like a hipster but I got into podcasts before they were cool. I got into podcasts in 2008. I don't really remember how I stumbled upon them. I do remember thinking how awesome the medium was. I instantly saw it as a great opportunity to both entertain and educate myself. Now I welcome waiting in long lines and getting stuck in traffic.
Ever since I discovered them, you would always see me with headphones on, even during school, which was a constant nuisance to my teachers. Podcasts have basically replaced music for me.
I not only listened to purely entertaining podcasts such as comedy and storytelling, but I also listened to educational ones. Podcasts made learning entertaining again! Ever since I discovered them, podcasts have been my main source of education. Not books and definitely not school.
What I love about podcasts the most, other than it being free, is that it is a great way to get to know people. (usually the host)
I have loved so many different podcasts and most of them have fallen out of favor over time, much like how friends sometimes fall out of favor.
This happens mostly because I have changed my preferences and priorities. For example, right now I'm in a period where I'm looking to improve my life, so a lot comedy and political podcasts have slowly fallen off my plate as I add more self-helpy ones.
Here are the podcasts that I'm currently listening to on a weekly basis:
There's a few more that I listen to depending whether I like the guest/topic but those are the ones I currently listen to no matter what.
Yesterday I listened to Isaac Morehouse's podcast episodes were TK Coleman told his story. In them I got to hear TK's weird professional path, which was nothing short of amazing. Other than being entertaining, there were quite a few lessons that I learned from his journey. Things like 'you don't need to plan out your whole life to be successful - you just need to treat every opportunity you take with integrity.' He also reinforced in me the importance of constantly doing something creative such as blogging.
However inspiring TK's story was, I couldn't help but think of how little I related to him. It seemed that he had a good amount of integrity, confidence, and resolve which are things that I'm currently lacking in.
Listening to the podcast made me wonder whether those intangibles can be newly created or whether they are something you need to have from the beginning in some way.
What if all of the qualities that make a person successful - integrity, confidence, resolve, resilience, curiosity, the ability to defer gratification etc. - have been killed inside of me due to the fact that they were neglected (and sometimes outright smothered) for so long?
I'm starting with a far from ideal family history, which has fostered in me immense self-doubt and self-hatred. Right now I'm in the process of removing all that muck from my system.
To this date, I have yet to hear stories that started with my specific deficiencies and ended up with happiness and fulfillment. Maybe there's a reason for that - because most of the ones that started like me didn't succeed. That's a really scary possibility.
Even if that's true I'm not going to let it stop me from trying.
One big annoyance I experienced growing up was whenever my parents forced me to say "thank you" in front of other people. It was bad enough that they teased words out of me with no care for what I actually felt, but to make me say it in front of another person angered me to no end. I'd think "now that you told me to do it, they'll think I won't really mean it! Now there's no point in saying it!" But I had no choice, so, humiliated, I said the words through gritted teeth.
Back then, I understood my annoyance intuitively. Now that I have the words and awareness for it I can say that the reason I was so annoyed was that I wanted to be true to myself. Not only did my parents disrespect my need for being genuine, I was also being robbed of the experience of the feeling behind the words. That's because I was made to focus more on empty words rather than actual appreciation.
Don't get me wrong, I am not against saying pleasantries like please and thank you. I actually do say them, but only when those words reflect my true feelings. What I am against is being coerced to say those words. I simply don't think the feeling of appreciation can be forced onto another person. In fact, this coercion often has the opposite effect. It may create people who will rarely feel appreciative, even if they do end up adopting the words that indicate it.
I think the best way to cultivate appreciative, kind and empathetic kids is to model the virtues yourself. We need to teach them that these feelings come from within and stop making them say "thank you" just because someone else told them to. In order to do that they need to be given the space to feel it.
I first found the joy of reading when I was about 15 years old. I know, it's a little late. Let me explain. The thing is, I didn't grow up in an environment that exemplified the fun of reading. In fact, I grew up in an environment that did the opposite. Case in point, I grew up with friends that would make fun of me if I were caught with a novel on hand. It also goes without saying that schools sucked at making reading appealing. Despite those obstacles, I ended up being gravitated towards books once.
I remember the first time I discovered the magic of books. It was during one summer in the empty library of the small town of Rugby, North Dakota. I went in there just because I enjoyed being alone and, since it was always relatively empty, I considered it my perfect place to be just that. Since I was there I thought 'why don't I start reading?' So I did. Now that I think about it, it's hard to believe that the first book I decided to read was Stephen King's The Stand. At more than 1100 pages long, I chose this book simply because it was the biggest book I could find. I just liked the challenge of it. Since it was Summer I had all day to read. And so I did. I averaged about 100 pages a day and I thought I was so awesome for it. The book did not disappoint. Not coincidentally, this was also the beginning of my love for horror.
After reading this book, I kept on reading. I picked up some more King books and then some James Patterson and then some Kenneth Oppel. I even got into the non-fiction world. I was loving it. But then everything changed when the Fire Nation attacked. And by "Fire Nation" I mean high school.
Once high school started, I read less and less frequently due to exhaustion. With class, homework and extra curriculars, I just couldn't find the time. There were waves during the summer when I got back into it, but for some reason it stopped being as fun. I guess I shouldn't pin this all on school, since my (let's say) suboptimal home-life was also not helping. It was like the fire in me that loved books was getting smaller. When high school was over I did start some books but never finished any.
There was still a part of me that loved books though. My high school days did not completely kill my yearning for books, but they certainly tried.
Fast forward to a year ago. My main source of education and entertainment has now been in the form of podcasts. I just found them a lot easier to get into. I knew however, that I was missing a lot of valuable pieces of content that were only in the form of books, so I thought to get myself a Kindle and try this reading thing again. So far I've found it to be a success. I've read quite a few full books for the first time in a long time. I've also read countless online articles that I never would have otherwise. I'm realizing now that the inconvenience of physical books has been a small but significant barrier for me.
Maybe it's the fact that I got a Kindle or maybe it's the fact that I'm escaping my depression (or maybe both), I'm just glad that I'm picking up reading again. I hope to someday regain that feeling of joy I had that first Summer. I miss it a lot.
In the professional world, we are appalled when employers abuse their power. For example, we feel it is extremely inappropriate for employers to make romantic advances on their employees. This is because the employee would be afraid to say no, since the possibility of getting fired would be in the back of their mind.
As we can see, employers have to act with more respect due to the reality of this power disparity. They have to be extra careful so as to not abuse their power. The greater the power disparity, the more respectful and careful the person of power must be.
The way I see it, there is no greater power disparity than in the parent-child relationship. Children depend on their parents in every way possible. They are completely defenseless and, unlike employees, they do not have the capacity to leave. That's why I believe children deserve the most respect and compassion we could give them. Just like in the employer/employee situation, it is extremely important for parents to be careful that they don't abuse their power. Unfortunately most people do the opposite.
Most parents believe it is perfectly okay to mold their children into whatever they want them to be. They implement many tactics that often run against the child's own wishes and they disrespect the child's autonomy. This causes many problems for the child in the long-run.
Parental abuse of power is not always as clear as inflicting physical pain. It can include more subtle things such as enforcing your beliefs onto them. Even more than the employer who makes a romantic advance, it is not fair to do these things to kids because they have an immense pressure to conform to your wishes.
We need to understand that kids are afraid to say no to you because they depend on you.
Kids need to be reassured that you wont take away their freedom for being their authentic selves. This is where the importance of unconditional love comes in. Most people say they love their children no matter what, but they have a rather flexible definition of love, which renders the word meaningless.
Just look at how we treat our children when they do something we disapprove of: we invoke guilt and fear, we threaten them, we neglect them, we inflict physical and emotional pain, we lie to them by saying "Santa won't bring presents this year" etc. To truly love a person you must first respect them, and those type of actions clearly show a lack of respect.
By abusing your power, you are raising a person who will continue to be a submissive people-pleaser and therefore become an easy target for abusive people. Either that or you will create a person who will use their own power as an opportunity to be abusive. I can't even tell what's worse.
Most people think disrespecting their child's autonomy is the only way to raise them right. Well, I'm here to say that it doesn't have to be that way. Not only do non-abusive methods exist, but implementing them will give you much better results.
Intuitively, we understand that if we can get the same results with either violence or non-violence, then the method of non-violence is infinitely more moral. To clarify, here are some examples of goals and how they can be met with and without violence:
Getting a girl - I can kidnap one and trap her in a well Buffalo Bill style, OR I can make myself appealing, ask her out, and allow her to voluntarily choose to be with me.
Getting a kid to do chores - I can threaten to hit him if he doesn't do it, OR I can negotiate or make a game out of it to help him want to do it.
Bettering the education system - I can take money from people against their will and subsidize public schools, OR I can work for, create or support companies like Praxis, which make education cheaper and more efficient.
Notice that the peaceful solutions require more work and creativity. On the other hand, violence is an easy, one-size-fits-all type of tool. It simply doesn't require much critical thought, work or patience.
Do you want something done but you're too lazy, incompetent and/or sadistic? Well, have I got the perfect solution for you: violence.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard people say that corporal punishment is absolutely necessary for this or that when they haven't even read a single book on peaceful parenting.
The lack of research is even more egregious when it comes to people advocating for government force. That's because people get their belief in government through social osmosis instead of through critical thought. Even people who don't care at all about politics are absolutely, 100% sure that society would collapse without government coercion. It's almost as if they were taught by schools run by governments. Oh, wait.
It really bothers me that most people argue for corporal punishment and institutionalized violence as if they've personally ruled out every voluntary option. It bothers me even more that those people are usually the same ones who claim to care about people.
About 70% of the U.S. population still endorses corporal punishment and the love for government coercion is as popular as the love for hamburgers. Do you think all of those people thoroughly examined their options before reaching those conclusions? Especially when I consider how little critical thought is promoted in schools, I doubt it.
The fact is, most people reach for the sword way too quickly. I attribute this to laziness, incompetency, and/or sadism. I mean, just think of the three violent scenarios I gave and see what applies with what. It's actually a fun thought experiment.
Whatever the reason is, I don't think it's an excuse. If people support violent solutions when they didn't even look for voluntary alternatives, I think they are being immoral. So, here's my general rule that everyone who does not want to be immoral must follow:
If you haven't properly searched for peaceful solutions, your default position should NOT be that a violent one is necessary.
(Of course, this is provided that you have the time to assess your options - I'm not suggesting, if a crazy guy ran at you with a knife, that you stop and think of every course of action before shooting him)
Doing merely some research is not enough. To do this properly, I recommend that you thoroughly test all proposed peaceful solutions. I know, it sounds like hard work, but you should be happy to have a high tolerance before resorting to violence. If you don't have that then I'm afraid you may have a bad case of authoritarianism.
Notice how, with this moral rule, it is easy to not do the wrong thing. It is just as simple as not advocating for or committing violence when you don't know enough. You can literally do this in your sleep!
If you're a person who has supported or committed violence without satisfying this rule, you probably want to demand that I show you a peaceful solution before you let go of your belief in the violent one. While I could probably point you to a non-violent alternative to some situations, the truth is that I shouldn't have to.
That's because the burden of proof is not on me, but rather on the people that claim that the ONLY way to get something done is through force. It's not up to the girl to prove to me why I shouldn't kidnap her. If I belt a child to get him to do chores, it is not up to him to justify why I shouldn't have done it. The same goes with me demanding forced redistribution of wealth. I'm the aggressor, so why should the victims carry the burden? Sadly this simple truth of who should carry the burden of proof has been tragically ignored.
Okay, now that you know these things, there really is no excuse. Like I said, all you have to do is drop your support of violence until you do the proper research. That is, if you don't want to be immoral. Luckily for you, there are people out there that have devoted their whole lives to finding peaceful alternatives. Every resource imaginable is easily accessible to us by the power of the internet. So, go out there and explore. Once you let go of the limiting idea that violence is necessary, you might be surprised by all the possibilities.
So It’s been about a year since I’ve set up this blog of mine and I’ve yet to post anything.
The main reason of why I’ve struggled to put anything on here is because I have severe anxiety. Basically I’m afraid to put my thoughts and feelings into the world and potentially being judged for them. There is a lot to say as to why I feel this way, which will have to be a topic for a future post.
So why do I want to publicly write about my thoughts and feelings if I am afraid of doing so?
Well, precisely because I don’t want to be afraid anymore. I want to finally feel free to express my true self (though first I have to do some digging to see who my true self is). I think confronting it in the form of a public blog is a great way to work towards that goal. Even if no one sees my writing, as a person with constant self-censorship in his system, this is a big step for me.
Besides that, there are so many benefits to writing a blog. Benefits which include:
So obviously there are many benefits, but just for the purpose of analysis I’ll list my potential hindrances:
That’s all I can think of right now though I’m sure there are more.
Anyway, I understand that this is a double-edged sword. After thinking about this long and hard, I’m betting that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Besides, I think that privacy is dead in this age and this blog is at least a way to control my “image.”