|
Austria24413 Posts
This is something I've noticed more and more and am finally able to put into words. In all aspects of our life, even in SC2 (although this blog has little to do with it), I find there's generally two sorts of options to pursue if you're making decisions. And since I'm a fan of categories, here's the two I've got for you this time.
1) Pleasant decisions. The most important goal when making a pleasant decision is not to solve the problem in a lasting, sustainable, permanent fashion. Instead, the goal is to convince yourself that you're addressing the issue at hand while really the underlying aim is to avoid hardship that may potentially happen when making a "right" decision.
2) Right/true decisions. Right decisions are harder to make, most of the time. The goal is to solve the problem without any loose ends. They're usually harder to make because every choice means abandoning one option in favor of another. The more difficult the problem to solve, the more difficult it will naturally be to make the right decision.
To help you follow my train of thought on this, here's an example. You're in a relationship that you've built together, but run into groundbreaking issues that cannot be solved. The easy, pleasant decision might be to stay together anyway and try to ignore the problem. Maybe with time, things will iron out - right? No. That's easy. It's pleasant, it's a safety mechanism to protect you from pain. Addressing these issues and taking necessary measures would be the true choice. And if the measure necessary is to break up - so be it. Hard, painful, not easy. But this is what ultimately solves a problem.
I'm telling you all this because it can be applied to any choice or decision that presents itself, and I just so happen to have had my own tough choices to make recently. I tried to do things the right way, but I can't say that the other party involved in the process did. That's what motivated me to write this in the end, although I've been thinking about it for a while.
In a way, you can blame almost all our problems on everyone doing things the easy way. Running out of oil? Start a war, we need that oil at the moment. We'll deal with whatever problems arise later. Refugees? Build walls, we'll figure something out and then we'll see. Running out of arguments? Try violence. Scared of being with someone and facing issues that might come with it? Well, call it off then. Your company invested millions and lost it all? Blame someone else, never own up to it. Need to stay ahead of your rivals in your market niche? Produce in China, use slave children to work for you.
I hate the pleasant way more than anything else. It shows cowardice and an inability to stay above it all and take all factors into consideration, then make calm and intelligent, sustainable decisions. The profits of doing things the easy way exist - they're real. But they're short lived and the potential harm is often larger than if you'd made done things the right way from the start.
It's the slow, dreadful death by a thousand cuts rather than the one swift, clean cut. Neither are pretty, but one does the job much faster and cleaner than the other, with much less suffering.
Do things the right way. Don't be a coward. Life sucks at times, deal with it. The good times will be all the better for it.
PS: lichter shoutout -__-
|
I like de blog.
Although sometimes you only realize a little later what the "right" decision would have been while you got overwhelmed by struggling emotions. Sometimes I have a hard time distinguishing if not taking a risk is the ballsy move or taking it. So more often than not you gotta learn to listen to your gut and not convince yourself xyz may be right for all the wrong reasons. My current wisdom and solution to this is finding some kind of self-sufficiency in terms of emotion and relaxtion. Don't make rushed decisions, or don't force yourself to actions you somehow, somewhere know are only counterproductive. More or less what you also said with killing a lot of options at once but at least not being a coward for it.
|
What happened to Plexa and Waffles? Weren't you about to duel someone?
|
United States32432 Posts
|
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22271 Posts
|
Austria24413 Posts
On February 23 2016 14:23 hellokitty[hk] wrote: What happened to Plexa and Waffles? Weren't you about to duel someone?
Broken promises happened
|
Took the easy way out giving Lichter a shoutout.
In a way I agree with you on doing things the right way. Yet I do things the easy (even wrong) way a lot of the time. It's not always within people's means to wrap up all troubles neatly with a bow. I think you're simplifying the problem by presenting real life decision making as a dichotomy where one is clearly superior and just requires all human beings to have a tad of character in exchange for a perfect world.
|
Nice blog, but I have to disagree a little bit.
Our decisions are rarely so black and white. Sure there is the easy way out, along with the difficult path, but there are many options available. Perhaps there is an easy way that works best, or maybe the 'right' choice will take too long and we don't have time to take that path.
Life is rarely so simple that we are presented with only 2 choices: the easy way vs. the right way.
As Saechiis stated,
I think you're simplifying the problem by presenting real life decision making as a dichotomy where one is clearly superior and just requires all human beings to have a tad of character in exchange for a perfect world.
|
I think it's more of a range than just two extremes, but I agree on your description of those 2 "directions". There's a metaphor I learned a while back that I think pictures this quite well. The easy way out is like an old pillow. Sure, it's yellow-ish, isn't as comfy as it used to be, but that's the one you always had. Your head shaped it over the years, it feels natural to rest on it. Of course, you'd probably be better off with a new one, and you know that, but you've spent many fine nights on that pillow, you don't really NEED to change it.
Doesn't apply as well to nations starting wars for oil or things like that, but on a personal level, it's quite fitting.
|
|
Dropping the DarkLord? Wow big changes.
Hang in there man!
|
"For what is each day, than a series of decisions, between the easy way and the right way?"
Was one of the lines in a motivational video that stuck in my head, now you shed some light on it, thank you!
|
i think it's extremely rare to be completely fair with your decisions, whether they're right, wrong, or your ideal. they most often affect more than one other person in your life, and that's not even including yourself. an individual won't even realize what's good for themselves.
in your example of the relationship, most if not everything is not unsolvable, it just requires an even heavier amount of effort and belief on top of the cognizances necessary to recognize the situation. i have faith that that's one step beyond the breakup, or having the solution in tow as necessary. of course, there's even more levels beyond even that.
i don't think it's taking the easier, or the more pleasant way per say. It's how much you're willing to invest and potentially lose in the process because of the mysterious outcome of what you cannot predict, or cannot control. as much as people are logical, some things exist and are endearing because they make no sense at all. many people form decisions based on that. many occupations, situations, etc. are hinged on empathy and understanding on a constant basis.
if you think things represent cowardice because they're done to save feelings and face, then most people shouldn't be working jobs that are necessary everyone elses' every day life--including your very own. it's not like they're choosing to do what they do as self-sacrafice, or even because it's simple and easy to do, and it's not even worth arguing about what is really happening in the minds of everyone who chooses or ends up working at the bottom of the barrel. the point is that there's always something better, for you, and for others, but all it is is you trying to do the best that you can do in the moment. there is a problem when you stop yearning for more, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad thing either. it's simply an opinion or a belief system based on you and your experiences up until that point. and once again, it is all completely subjective and everyone is making the "wrong" choice constantly regardless of their wishes.
i think you need to work out what you want, and stop focusing on others. there are plenty of fish in the sea, and you (and hypothetically, everyone) make less than ideal decisions despite your efforts, all the damn time.
|
I agree with the general frame of your thought, tough I'd say the the "right" decision is often the one with the best gains vs risks balance, because decisions inherently have both predictable/likely and unpredictable/unlikely outcomes.
|
Although I like the concept of what you're talking about: breaking up is definitely the pleasant choice in your example.
It is much harder to fix problems than to run away from problems. Staying is always the harder choice.
|
I like the theory. I'm guilty of of picking pleasant in relationships, business, cleanliness. What's funny is how your worldview really shapes the examples. I might agree with 20% if that.
In a way, you can blame almost all our problems on everyone doing things the easy way. Running out of oil? Start a war, we need that oil at the moment. We'll deal with whatever problems arise later. Refugees? Build walls, we'll figure something out and then we'll see. Running out of arguments? Try violence. Scared of being with someone and facing issues that might come with it? Well, call it off then. Your company invested millions and lost it all? Blame someone else, never own up to it. Need to stay ahead of your rivals in your market niche? Produce in China, use slave children to work for you. Threats overseas? Ignore them. We'll treat each instance as a one-off. Refugees? Import them all! We'll deal with violence and assimilation later. We all know to lead with our feelings not our heads. Running out of arguments? Shift the subject, twist the blame, incite and provoke, violence. Special interests want their gravy train again? Pass the pork, you have little to gain for following your conscience towards a new world. Market taxation and regulation driving more manufacturing overseas? Blame evil companies that use third-world labor. Blame globalization. Look no farther than the low-wage labor, definitely don't look at no-wage unemployment!
I don't want to dredge up the ideological divide. I'm just amazed how it varies from person to person.
|
Austria24413 Posts
Oh absolutely, I probably should have made that clear actually. I don't believe in an objective "right/wrong". What the "right" thing is varies from person to person, everyone needs something different.
|
everyone needs a swift cut
I for one will heed your advice and get a haircut
|
I recommend reading Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow if you are interested in this topic. Kahneman is a Nobel winning psychologist, in part because of the research discussed in this book. Basically there are two different brain systems that evolved at different times, the primitive animal brain that instinctively makes quick decisions, and the advanced human brain which houses the consciousness, which can determine things in detail, but is energy intensive and lazy.
|
You're better than her anyway
|
On February 24 2016 03:47 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote: Nice blog, but I have to disagree a little bit.
Our decisions are rarely so black and white. Sure there is the easy way out, along with the difficult path, but there are many options available. Perhaps there is an easy way that works best, or maybe the 'right' choice will take too long and we don't have time to take that path.
Strongly disagree. It actually irks me when when people can't come to terms with a decision. There is always a clear cut best outcome to choose from -- if you think that there is not, then you really need to create some values for yourself to live by and shape as you live your days.
On February 26 2016 15:57 nanaoei wrote:
in your example of the relationship, most if not everything is not unsolvable, it just requires an even heavier amount of effort and belief on top of the cognizances necessary to recognize the situation. i have faith that that's one step beyond the breakup, or having the solution in tow as necessary. of course, there's even more levels beyond even that.
If you have to mold somebody you're in a relationship with then you should just cut it immediately. Any ounce of discontent or unhappiness experienced should not be tolerated. It's fine to have disagreements or even arguments with a significant other as long as the issue at hand doesn't make you genuinely unhappy.
On February 23 2016 07:41 Olli wrote: I hate the pleasant way more than anything else. It shows cowardice and an inability to stay above it all and take all factors into consideration, then make calm and intelligent, sustainable decisions. We all make poor decisions, sometimes without even knowing it. The best thing that can be done is just to bury it and move on and learn from the experience.
|
On March 01 2016 11:42 Agh wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2016 03:47 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote: Nice blog, but I have to disagree a little bit.
Our decisions are rarely so black and white. Sure there is the easy way out, along with the difficult path, but there are many options available. Perhaps there is an easy way that works best, or maybe the 'right' choice will take too long and we don't have time to take that path.
Strongly disagree. It actually irks me when when people can't come to terms with a decision. There is always a clear cut best outcome to choose from -- if you think that there is not, then you really need to create some values for yourself to live by and shape as you live your days. Show nested quote +On February 26 2016 15:57 nanaoei wrote:
in your example of the relationship, most if not everything is not unsolvable, it just requires an even heavier amount of effort and belief on top of the cognizances necessary to recognize the situation. i have faith that that's one step beyond the breakup, or having the solution in tow as necessary. of course, there's even more levels beyond even that.
If you have to mold somebody you're in a relationship with then you should just cut it immediately. Any ounce of discontent or unhappiness experienced should not be tolerated. It's fine to have disagreements or even arguments with a significant other as long as the issue at hand doesn't make you genuinely unhappy. Show nested quote +On February 23 2016 07:41 Olli wrote: I hate the pleasant way more than anything else. It shows cowardice and an inability to stay above it all and take all factors into consideration, then make calm and intelligent, sustainable decisions. We all make poor decisions, sometimes without even knowing it. The best thing that can be done is just to bury it and move on and learn from the experience.
Oh, you young people are so cute when you think there's certainty in the world it's so adorable really.
|
Ruby Rogues had a podcast this week about the normalization of deviance.
Kind of plays with what you're trying to think about. Doing things you know are wrong not necessarily because they are themselves easier, but because they've artificially been made easier by warped incentives to do the wrong thing / and a general culture saying 'we know we doing it wrong' without any plan to fix it, and with a lot of friction when you are the only person who does want to fix it / the people you're fixing it for don't appreciate it.
But I think the categorization of pleasant and right decision is a bad one. It follows the fallacy that something is better just because it is harder. Actually, pleasant and right decisions are the same thing. You save yourself lots of pain doing things right, and you are immediately filled with pride as you make them. It's just a problem when the right decision is made artificially painful by outside factors, like a boss who needs something done in an hour, and your own emotions of frustration clouding your ability to even think what the right thing to do is.
For human relationships, actually the pleasant decision is almost always better. You could be a drama queen and make ultimatums and or get loud and angry and be unpleasant, but the most effective relationships utilize communication and discussion. It's painful to talk to people who don't know how to discuss without arguing, and also useless. Being pleasant and just discussing things usually leads to a satisfying result for everyone. And when someone is a brick wall, the more pleasant thing to do is to avoid them. The unpleasant, and useless thing, to try to get them to listen.
The decision you're talking about, the flimsy one that doesn't address the problem, I don't find that pleasant. I can't really trick myself into thinking a problem is solved when it isn't. So I lose sleep if I have to do your version of a 'pleasant' decision.
|
On March 02 2016 05:12 Chef wrote: Ruby Rogues had a podcast this week about the normalization of deviance.
Kind of plays with what you're trying to think about. Doing things you know are wrong not necessarily because they are themselves easier, but because they've artificially been made easier by warped incentives to do the wrong thing / and a general culture saying 'we know we doing it wrong' without any plan to fix it, and with a lot of friction when you are the only person who does want to fix it / the people you're fixing it for don't appreciate it.
But I think the categorization of pleasant and right decision is a bad one. It follows the fallacy that something is better just because it is harder. Actually, pleasant and right decisions are the same thing. You save yourself lots of pain doing things right, and you are immediately filled with pride as you make them. It's just a problem when the right decision is made artificially painful by outside factors, like a boss who needs something done in an hour, and your own emotions of frustration clouding your ability to even think what the right thing to do is.
For human relationships, actually the pleasant decision is almost always better. You could be a drama queen and make ultimatums and or get loud and angry and be unpleasant, but the most effective relationships utilize communication and discussion. It's painful to talk to people who don't know how to discuss without arguing, and also useless. Being pleasant and just discussing things usually leads to a satisfying result for everyone. And when someone is a brick wall, the more pleasant thing to do is to avoid them. The unpleasant, and useless thing, to try to get them to listen.
The decision you're talking about, the flimsy one that doesn't address the problem, I don't find that pleasant. I can't really trick myself into thinking a problem is solved when it isn't. So I lose sleep if I have to do your version of a 'pleasant' decision.
TLDR
Running from problems is not the same thing as solving them. Working through problems is not the same thing as accepting them.
|
I definitely think you set up a false dichotomy here... Other than that, I think I agree with your general sentiment. Often the thing we know we "should" do fails to line up with the thing we want to do. In this situation, it isn't always easy to do what we should do, but even then it's really hard to pinpoint exactly what we "should" do in any situation.
I also think this is a huge oversimplification:
In a way, you can blame almost all our problems on everyone doing things the easy way. I don't think you can blame "almost all of our problems" on any one thing. I don't think I can blame "almost all" of my problems on a single thing...
Anyways, I agree with the general idea that there is value to facing one's problems directly even if that may be hard or unpleasant. I disagree with just about everything else.
|
On March 02 2016 08:34 Naracs_Duc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2016 05:12 Chef wrote: Ruby Rogues had a podcast this week about the normalization of deviance.
Kind of plays with what you're trying to think about. Doing things you know are wrong not necessarily because they are themselves easier, but because they've artificially been made easier by warped incentives to do the wrong thing / and a general culture saying 'we know we doing it wrong' without any plan to fix it, and with a lot of friction when you are the only person who does want to fix it / the people you're fixing it for don't appreciate it.
But I think the categorization of pleasant and right decision is a bad one. It follows the fallacy that something is better just because it is harder. Actually, pleasant and right decisions are the same thing. You save yourself lots of pain doing things right, and you are immediately filled with pride as you make them. It's just a problem when the right decision is made artificially painful by outside factors, like a boss who needs something done in an hour, and your own emotions of frustration clouding your ability to even think what the right thing to do is.
For human relationships, actually the pleasant decision is almost always better. You could be a drama queen and make ultimatums and or get loud and angry and be unpleasant, but the most effective relationships utilize communication and discussion. It's painful to talk to people who don't know how to discuss without arguing, and also useless. Being pleasant and just discussing things usually leads to a satisfying result for everyone. And when someone is a brick wall, the more pleasant thing to do is to avoid them. The unpleasant, and useless thing, to try to get them to listen.
The decision you're talking about, the flimsy one that doesn't address the problem, I don't find that pleasant. I can't really trick myself into thinking a problem is solved when it isn't. So I lose sleep if I have to do your version of a 'pleasant' decision. TLDR Running from problems is not the same thing as solving them. Working through problems is not the same thing as accepting them. You could probably write a more reasonable reply by reading the thing you're replying to.
Although I take the point that more forum posts are very verbose and I don't spend enough time whittling them down to just the core meaning. If you were attempting to whittle it down, you really missed it though. But I think you were attempting to argue with something I didn't say. So all around great effort, I can't fail you for not doing your homework since that's no longer allowed in the current education system.
|
On March 02 2016 23:53 Chef wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2016 08:34 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 02 2016 05:12 Chef wrote: Ruby Rogues had a podcast this week about the normalization of deviance.
Kind of plays with what you're trying to think about. Doing things you know are wrong not necessarily because they are themselves easier, but because they've artificially been made easier by warped incentives to do the wrong thing / and a general culture saying 'we know we doing it wrong' without any plan to fix it, and with a lot of friction when you are the only person who does want to fix it / the people you're fixing it for don't appreciate it.
But I think the categorization of pleasant and right decision is a bad one. It follows the fallacy that something is better just because it is harder. Actually, pleasant and right decisions are the same thing. You save yourself lots of pain doing things right, and you are immediately filled with pride as you make them. It's just a problem when the right decision is made artificially painful by outside factors, like a boss who needs something done in an hour, and your own emotions of frustration clouding your ability to even think what the right thing to do is.
For human relationships, actually the pleasant decision is almost always better. You could be a drama queen and make ultimatums and or get loud and angry and be unpleasant, but the most effective relationships utilize communication and discussion. It's painful to talk to people who don't know how to discuss without arguing, and also useless. Being pleasant and just discussing things usually leads to a satisfying result for everyone. And when someone is a brick wall, the more pleasant thing to do is to avoid them. The unpleasant, and useless thing, to try to get them to listen.
The decision you're talking about, the flimsy one that doesn't address the problem, I don't find that pleasant. I can't really trick myself into thinking a problem is solved when it isn't. So I lose sleep if I have to do your version of a 'pleasant' decision. TLDR Running from problems is not the same thing as solving them. Working through problems is not the same thing as accepting them. You could probably write a more reasonable reply by reading the thing you're replying to. Although I take the point that more forum posts are very verbose and I don't spend enough time whittling them down to just the core meaning. If you were attempting to whittle it down, you really missed it though. But I think you were attempting to argue with something I didn't say. So all around great effort, I can't fail you for not doing your homework since that's no longer allowed in the current education system.
Wasn't arguing, was agreeing. The OP is making the argument that there are only easy choices, and hard choices, and uses that as a jumping off point to give him a reason to leave his partner--because its hard and he's not happy in the immediate present. This is a bad argument to me, not because I don't disagree with his conclusion (he's perfectly free to leave her) but I disagree with the axioms he is presenting as true.
When it comes to solving problems, there are only two ways to do it. Either stick around and work on it, or run away from it. Neither of the two options is right or wrong, they are simply attempts at reaching a solved state. Sticking around does not automatically mean you're ignoring it (although it can), while running away does not mean the problem is resolved (although it also can).
Trying to frame human decision making as a moralistic zero sum game is weird and ignores the actual complexity of why we have human interaction in the first place.
In short:
Running from problems is not the same thing as solving them. Working through problems is not the same thing as accepting them.
|
Austria24413 Posts
On March 03 2016 03:24 Naracs_Duc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2016 23:53 Chef wrote:On March 02 2016 08:34 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 02 2016 05:12 Chef wrote: Ruby Rogues had a podcast this week about the normalization of deviance.
Kind of plays with what you're trying to think about. Doing things you know are wrong not necessarily because they are themselves easier, but because they've artificially been made easier by warped incentives to do the wrong thing / and a general culture saying 'we know we doing it wrong' without any plan to fix it, and with a lot of friction when you are the only person who does want to fix it / the people you're fixing it for don't appreciate it.
But I think the categorization of pleasant and right decision is a bad one. It follows the fallacy that something is better just because it is harder. Actually, pleasant and right decisions are the same thing. You save yourself lots of pain doing things right, and you are immediately filled with pride as you make them. It's just a problem when the right decision is made artificially painful by outside factors, like a boss who needs something done in an hour, and your own emotions of frustration clouding your ability to even think what the right thing to do is.
For human relationships, actually the pleasant decision is almost always better. You could be a drama queen and make ultimatums and or get loud and angry and be unpleasant, but the most effective relationships utilize communication and discussion. It's painful to talk to people who don't know how to discuss without arguing, and also useless. Being pleasant and just discussing things usually leads to a satisfying result for everyone. And when someone is a brick wall, the more pleasant thing to do is to avoid them. The unpleasant, and useless thing, to try to get them to listen.
The decision you're talking about, the flimsy one that doesn't address the problem, I don't find that pleasant. I can't really trick myself into thinking a problem is solved when it isn't. So I lose sleep if I have to do your version of a 'pleasant' decision. TLDR Running from problems is not the same thing as solving them. Working through problems is not the same thing as accepting them. You could probably write a more reasonable reply by reading the thing you're replying to. Although I take the point that more forum posts are very verbose and I don't spend enough time whittling them down to just the core meaning. If you were attempting to whittle it down, you really missed it though. But I think you were attempting to argue with something I didn't say. So all around great effort, I can't fail you for not doing your homework since that's no longer allowed in the current education system. Wasn't arguing, was agreeing. The OP is making the argument that there are only easy choices, and hard choices, and uses that as a jumping off point to give him a reason to leave his partner--because its hard and he's not happy in the immediate present.
Yeah, that isn't it at all. That was an example, not more. Also you misunderstood the distinction. It isn't easy and hard choices, it's pleasant and right choices. Making the right choice can be incredibly easy, making a pleasant choice can be incredibly hard.
And also, what you just described as "it being hard and not being happy in the immediate present" is exactly where a decision needs to be made. The "right" approach in my book would be to try and work it out as well as possible - but if the problem can't be solved and there are issues between the two partners that cannot be solved even after trying to fix them, then breaking up becomes the right choice. Staying together, pretending everything's fine would be pleasant.
Never in all of this did I say that you should skip the "trying to work it out" part. In fact, breaking up without trying to fix the issue at hand would be the exact opposite: that would be the pleasant, easy choice to make. Trying to work out problems is hard and can be incredibly painful. Cutting that part out to protect yourself from the potential pain - now that's pleasant.
|
On March 03 2016 04:53 Olli wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2016 03:24 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 02 2016 23:53 Chef wrote:On March 02 2016 08:34 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 02 2016 05:12 Chef wrote: Ruby Rogues had a podcast this week about the normalization of deviance.
Kind of plays with what you're trying to think about. Doing things you know are wrong not necessarily because they are themselves easier, but because they've artificially been made easier by warped incentives to do the wrong thing / and a general culture saying 'we know we doing it wrong' without any plan to fix it, and with a lot of friction when you are the only person who does want to fix it / the people you're fixing it for don't appreciate it.
But I think the categorization of pleasant and right decision is a bad one. It follows the fallacy that something is better just because it is harder. Actually, pleasant and right decisions are the same thing. You save yourself lots of pain doing things right, and you are immediately filled with pride as you make them. It's just a problem when the right decision is made artificially painful by outside factors, like a boss who needs something done in an hour, and your own emotions of frustration clouding your ability to even think what the right thing to do is.
For human relationships, actually the pleasant decision is almost always better. You could be a drama queen and make ultimatums and or get loud and angry and be unpleasant, but the most effective relationships utilize communication and discussion. It's painful to talk to people who don't know how to discuss without arguing, and also useless. Being pleasant and just discussing things usually leads to a satisfying result for everyone. And when someone is a brick wall, the more pleasant thing to do is to avoid them. The unpleasant, and useless thing, to try to get them to listen.
The decision you're talking about, the flimsy one that doesn't address the problem, I don't find that pleasant. I can't really trick myself into thinking a problem is solved when it isn't. So I lose sleep if I have to do your version of a 'pleasant' decision. TLDR Running from problems is not the same thing as solving them. Working through problems is not the same thing as accepting them. You could probably write a more reasonable reply by reading the thing you're replying to. Although I take the point that more forum posts are very verbose and I don't spend enough time whittling them down to just the core meaning. If you were attempting to whittle it down, you really missed it though. But I think you were attempting to argue with something I didn't say. So all around great effort, I can't fail you for not doing your homework since that's no longer allowed in the current education system. Wasn't arguing, was agreeing. The OP is making the argument that there are only easy choices, and hard choices, and uses that as a jumping off point to give him a reason to leave his partner--because its hard and he's not happy in the immediate present. Yeah, that isn't it at all. That was an example, not more. Also you misunderstood the distinction. It isn't easy and hard choices, it's pleasant and right choices. Making the right choice can be incredibly easy, making a pleasant choice can be incredibly hard. And also, what you just described as "it being hard and not being happy in the immediate present" is exactly where a decision needs to be made. The "right" approach in my book would be to try and work it out as well as possible - but if the problem can't be solved and there are issues between the two partners that cannot be solved even after trying to fix them, then breaking up becomes the right choice. Staying together, pretending everything's fine would be pleasant. Never in all of this did I say that you should skip the "trying to work it out" part. In fact, breaking up without trying to fix the issue at hand would be the exact opposite: that would be the pleasant, easy choice to make. Trying to work out problems is hard and can be incredibly painful. Cutting that part out to protect yourself from the potential pain - now that's pleasant.
This is where you're trying to argue semantics. You believe there is a dichotomy when it comes to choice, and you attempt to use definitions to skew the perspective by using non-comparative word choices. By defining one choice as being "right" it automatically makes the case that the other choice is automatically "wrong." And then by making the definition of the other choice "pleasant" you attempt to lure people into thinking that the opposing side must be "hard/unpleasant."
But then the entire ruse falls apart the moment you actually attempt to show an example. Mainly because human relationships aren't math problems.
Person A is unhappy with Person B. So you make the axiom that Person A leaving Person B is the right choice. Being that you have pre-framed the wrong choice as "pleasant", you attempt to say that leaving the person must be "unpleasant." But you haven't even shown how them leaving is unpleasant. If Person A is unhappy with Person B, the only logical conclusion that can be made is that leaving is the pleasant thing to do. Staying and remaining unhappy is the complete opposite of pleasant. In the scenario, staying is unpleasant in two ways--if you ignore the problems then you will be unhappy since that is the axiom of the scenario. Staying is also unpleasant if you choose not to ignore the problems and attempt to fix it--since working out problems is always hard and unpleasant, otherwise there wasn't really any problems to begin with. That means, in your example, the only pleasant option is leaving, which you attempt to state is the right action. But it makes me think--why would he think this? And it becomes obvious that you are mistaking the presupposed conclusion as being the same thing as the immediate decision. Which forces us to go back to your attempt at semantic word play. You attempt to force two concepts as one thing Right vs Wrong and Pleasant vs Unpleasant. This means that you believe decisions have two components, one being logical and one being emotional. You believe the logical choice must be the correct one, and that the emotional choice must be the wrong one. Because of this, you attempt to conflate the two comparative phrases. Pleasant vs Wrong, which suggests you also believe that other is true--Unpleasant vs Right. But, you see, we already have words we use for that--Hard vs Easy, which has the same meaning as Pleasant vs Unpleasant. And this is where it you really show yourself. You see, you believe that Easy choices must be wrong, because hard choices must be right. Its apparent by your word choice, it is apparent by your argument, and it is apparent by your examples. But here's the thing--as could be shown by just exploring your example, it turns out there is no right or wrong answer. Just all these options with some being harder or easier than the other. The only time right and wrong answers really come up is in hindsight, something that immediate choices do not have access to. In hindsight, you can see it was right to have run from your relationship. In hindsight, you can see it was wrong to have run from your relationship. But you do not know that in the immediate present. In the immediate present, you only have easy choices (pleasant) and hard choices (unpleasant) and both are as likely to be the right choice as the other.
Here's how it works. If there is a problem, you either work on it or run away from it. One is easier than the other, and you won't know you made the right decision until you've already made it.
That's it, that's all that it is. Until you've resolved a problem, you can always spend more energy working to fix it. There is no definite line where things are "solvable/unsolvable," there only comes a time where it is easier to run away than it is to stay and some people choose to run away than to keep trying to fix it.
|
Austria24413 Posts
|
On March 03 2016 06:33 Olli wrote: Disagreed, entirely.
Its the pleasant choice to do so
|
Austria24413 Posts
On March 03 2016 06:35 Naracs_Duc wrote:Its the pleasant choice to do so
I don't think you can work through everything. That's wishful thinking. Some fundamental issues cannot be solved between certain people. I'd never be able to work out issues between myself and Bin Laden or something - obviously exaggerating, but you get the train of thought.
|
On March 03 2016 06:49 Olli wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2016 06:35 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 03 2016 06:33 Olli wrote: Disagreed, entirely. Its the pleasant choice to do so I don't think you can work through everything. That's wishful thinking. Some fundamental issues cannot be solved between certain people. I'd never be able to work out issues between myself and Bin Laden or something - obviously exaggerating, but you get the train of thought.
But that's a hindsight issue isn't it? At its core, all problems have possible answers. Whether you believe that answer is worth it or not worth it is purely subjective.
Bin Laden is dead, but lets assume you had fundamental problems with the current IS leadership. There are many ways to interact with them. You could join a terror cell, move up the ranks until you are seen as one of their peers, and then you can have a deep and direct conversation with each other about your issues with them. Maybe that's too much commitment? You could join a military/mercenary/humanitarian branch and go over to Syria and actively work against the regime. Maybe still too much commitment? And you could keep working on doing overly extreme ways to reach out, interact with, and attempt to solve your issues with them, make it be both your life and career goal, and work your way to be a world leader to do it. But no matter which road you take, you always have to ask yourself--is solving this problem worth doing, or would I rather take the easier route instead.
Its not really about whether or not you can or can't solve the issues--its really about how far are you willing to go to maintain that conversation.
And then, when you're in the conversation, how much is each side willing to cede to make it work, and how much is each side willing fight to not have to cede. And even that part of the issue, whether to cede or stand your ground during the fight, that too is about hard or easy choices, and not really about right or wrong choices.
Lets go back to the extreme example of a person's issues with a global terrorist leader. Is what you are doing right now more important than trying to stop an act of genocide? If its not, then you're obviously making the wrong moral choice, because you could be actively trying to stop genocide instead of reading threads on Teamliquid. But will you make that be your new mission? Or is it much easier to just ignore genocide and keep reading social media?
Trump is currently running for president. If he became the president, would choosing not to assassinate him make you complicit in everything bad he's about to do? Maybe, maybe not, it depends on how vested you are in it. Most people would take the easy choice, and not actively try and make America a better place--because its too hard to assassinate a president. But that act of choice, that act of choosing to try and solve an issue, no matter how hard it seems to solve, or choosing to run away from an issue because of how much easier of an option it seems to run away, that is what choice is at its core. The truth is that until you've followed solved a problem (or died trying to solve a problem), there is always MORE you could be doing, more you could be ceding, and more you could be pushing. Which is why it isn't wrong to choose not to fix a problem. It isn't wrong to choose the easier choice.
|
Austria24413 Posts
But conversation isn't a solution, and it shouldn't be - endless conversation is the exact opposite of finding a solution. At some point you should reach the conclusion that you won't find a solution (this isn't running away, it's simply realizing that a problem cannot be solved) and you stop. That itself can be a solution, in my book at least.
I don't like that talk about "the wrong moral choice" - there isn't a right or wrong in my opinion. Which is what makes the "right" and "pleasant" decisions completely different for everyone. Accepting your own inability to do, as you essentially put it, "everything" for the rest of your days is a realization and stopping might just be the right choice for you. But there's a difference in actually working up the courage to figure out and accept your own shortcomings and make decisions with them in mind, and making those decisions without even thinking all through or trying first. You can come to the same conclusion but it's the way you get to your solution that's important to me.
Take the relationship example, we can even turn it around if you like to make it end happily. Two partners figure out a problem with their relationship. Pleasant option: ignore the problem, act like it doesn't matter, stay together. Might work, might not work. But hey, saves you the potential hardship of having to accept that everything isn't alright. "Right" option: accept that there are issues. Embrace them, work on solving them. Find a way to continue - stay together. Might be hard work to get to common ground, but at least that problem is solved for good.
They stay together in both examples, but one will leave you in a much stronger, safer place - because you actually solved the problem instead of hiding from it.
|
On March 03 2016 08:07 Olli wrote: But conversation isn't a solution, and it shouldn't be - endless conversation is the exact opposite of finding a solution. At some point you should reach the conclusion that you won't find a solution (this isn't running away, it's simply realizing that a problem cannot be solved) and you stop. That itself can be a solution, in my book at least.
I don't like that talk about "the wrong moral choice" - there isn't a right or wrong in my opinion. Which is what makes the "right" and "pleasant" decisions completely different for everyone. Accepting your own inability to do, as you essentially put it, "everything" for the rest of your days is a realization and stopping might just be the right choice for you. But there's a difference in actually working up the courage to figure out and accept your own shortcomings and make decisions with them in mind, and making those decisions without even thinking all through or trying first. You can come to the same conclusion but it's the way you get to your solution that's important to me.
Take the relationship example, we can even turn it around if you like to make it end happily. Two partners figure out a problem with their relationship. Pleasant option: ignore the problem, act like it doesn't matter, stay together. Might work, might not work. But hey, saves you the potential hardship of having to accept that everything isn't alright. "Right" option: accept that there are issues. Embrace them, work on solving them. Find a way to continue - stay together. Might be hard work to get to common ground, but at least that problem is solved for good.
They stay together in both examples, but one will leave you in a much stronger, safer place - because you actually solved the problem instead of hiding from it.
The goal is not endless conversation. The goal is finding a solution. But you do not know when a solution is going to be made, nor do you get to decide when a solution is made. The order of events is "Problem, solving, solution" not "Problem, solution, solving."
Now, if you're idea of "solving" a problem is "I want things to be ____" and then try to force the circumstance/partner into that preconceived solution--then I can see why you would feel that its possible to hit a brick wall. But if you are honestly trying to find a solution, and not trying to mold people to your will, then there is always a way to fix things--even if what needs fixing is you. If the problem solving becomes too difficult and you rather run away, then you run away. Whether something gets resolved or not is irrelevant to the choices we make.
Lets go back to the relationship example. You guys are unhappy, so you either stay unhappy, try to fix things, or leave. Leaving is the most pleasant of those choices, since staying would make you unhappy, and working through problems is hard. So you attempt to fix it, and its taking longer than you would like. You now have the choice of continuing to work on it (the less pleasant choice), or leaving (the pleasant choice). Why do this? Because finding a solution does not guarantee a solution. Much like anything, its always much harder to push forward and keep looking than it is to give up. But just like anything--there is nothing wrong with giving up.
|
On February 28 2016 19:31 Olli wrote: Oh absolutely, I probably should have made that clear actually. I don't believe in an objective "right/wrong". What the "right" thing is varies from person to person, everyone needs something different. Exactly so. Good blog keep them coming!
|
Choices are not always easily categorizable as right/wrong or pleasant. There's a lot of blur-ambiguity. Gonna give an example when I have the time...
|
On February 27 2016 04:24 Naracs_Duc wrote: Although I like the concept of what you're talking about: breaking up is definitely the pleasant choice in your example.
It is much harder to fix problems than to run away from problems. Staying is always the harder choice.
FYI staying is not always the harder choice, sometimes staying is the easier choice because it preserves the status quo.
|
On March 05 2016 02:24 Trainrunnef wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2016 04:24 Naracs_Duc wrote: Although I like the concept of what you're talking about: breaking up is definitely the pleasant choice in your example.
It is much harder to fix problems than to run away from problems. Staying is always the harder choice.
FYI staying is not always the harder choice, sometimes staying is the easier choice because it preserves the status quo.
I don't understand your logic.
Person A is unhappy. Person A looks for a solution. Person A believes solution to be maintaining status quo.
That, to me, does not break from what I just described.
If the rewards of leaving a problem is less than the rewards of staying with a problem, then the easy choice is to stay with the problem. How you value the rewards system will always be fluid and changing--but there is no "let me stay because its easier" unless your goal is to not find solutions. In which case, you are in an unpleasant situation and you choose to remain in an unpleasant situation. At no point is the act of staying not the unpleasant choice.
|
|
|
|