Live data from Hacker News

The intolerable rise of perfectionism

theguardian.com

51–60 of 103 posts

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#51
post #14
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I've met too many untalented perfectionist, I'm sure they exist though (feels like an unfortunate combo). I just feel talent is orthogonal to perfectionism.

Not necessarily untalented, but not as talented as they wish they were. Edit: In other words, it's easier to have good taste than it is to be good at designing/producing something.

I think I know the sort of person you’re talking about, but perfectionism can also result in extremely driven individuals.

I suspect there’s a triplet at play here, with either discipline or bravery as the other side. A demotivated perfectionist never rises to their own challenge. With a motivated one, get out of the way or get run over.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#52
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sound like you are projecting, honestly. Maybe you've been around perfectionists that worked against you rather than with you. The point of perfectionism is to be more talented. If you read too deeply into that and don't look at the whole picture, of course it's going to be annoying. But the root starts with a desire to be better because the feeling of stagnation is intolerable.

> You sound like you are projecting, honestly. Spot on. > Maybe you've been around perfectionists that worked against you rather than with you. That would have been me :-) > The point of perfectionism is to be more talented. That's part of what I meant when I said "Resolution lies on either end, depending on how possible/practical it is to improve a given skill." Another way to resolve the tension is to accept to hav…

> Another way to resolve the tension is to accept to have lower standards and go on with your life.

For myself, long run, that is going to increase tension for me internally. I can't force myself to be satisfied with myself if I am not. I'd rather believe in a world that lacks absolute standards in perpetuity and have to consider myself perpetually adaptive than believe I've either succumbed to some group think ideology of 'relaxing' because it's comfortable for people who are fine with me being substandard (and then I get stuck with the problem of - is this because they are using me for their own comparison?), or been indoctrinated into stupid thinking that is fine with lowering my standards because it judges me based on a particular context that may not be indicative of an overall trend of my life absolutely.

> "Resolution lies on either end, depending on how possible/practical it is to improve a given skill."

At the end of the day pragmatism must be valued. Competition between people is useful but if it turns into a downward spiral of stepping on one another arbitrarily without reason, logic, without any ends tied to the means - then there is no united sense of progress from which every person inside a group can orient direction in thinking, and unifying action into something beautiful. I'm a software developer and computer scientist, so, all the spaces between coding (thinking, interacting) need to be filled in and can't always be explicitly stated. People have to make assumptions, it's easier to just decide - do you like where you are? Do you like the people around you? Can you see value in all of this?

If you can't do that, that is when competition becomes destructive rather than productive. Being able to identify these things in real time, continual process of living life. I wish I could be weak sometimes just because it's easier, but my life hasn't allowed me to be. I make mistakes continuously and sometimes they are plain to see, not only to myself, but to everybody. The awareness of this - in perpetuity. This connects people to systems that are always attempting to correct behavior. So people who go over and over and over at it - it's the same thing. No judgment, being totally neutral is most simple. Functioning like a machine. It's easier to just call it aspergers or neurologically distinct. Can't know people's intentions and inferring them to be intentionally malicious can lead to disaster. The problem of wanting to avoid the truly worst things that could happen in life. Not just because bad things have happened, but because, hyper-awareness. We are always connected to things that say 'bad things happen to people' and not everything can be explained away.

Talent, necessity, etc. Survival instinct. Calling it talent seems to be a diminutive, it directs the focus towards something narcissistic, vain - easy to prejudice against. Some things are born from necessity. Process of continual refinement, it's a compulsion because it says "I need to survive".

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#53
post #12
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A perfectionist is someone with more exigence than talent. My dictionary defines 'exigence' (which I had not encountered before) as "an urgent need or demand", and I find that hard to parse. Is either of the parses "… who is more demanding than talented" or (like "grasp exceeds reach") "… whose demands exceed his or her talent" correct? If not, would you mind clarifying?

My bad, "exigence" is a French word whose meaning isn't exactly identical in English. To be exigent means to have a high standard. The verb "exiger" means "to require". English adds an urgency dimension that doesn't exist in French. Many French words built on that template (direct latin root + -ent/-ence suffix) can be used as is in English, but it is not always the case.

I figured out what you meant. I suspect a lot of other Romance language students did too. Exiger seems like a 4th year sort of word though, and a lot of us unfortunately are only required to take 2 or 3 years, and German or Japanese are not uncommon.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#54
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything is a mental health condition these days. Honestly I think the mental health care industry is getting nervous over how complex, diverse and non-trivial it is to understand minds. It's easy for the field to operate on the premise 'but these poor people, we are trying to help them!'. It's at the least, a bit absurd to be hypercritical over every little detail of thinking, acting, behaving, processing, etc and…

> It seems more that one has to be cautious with who one displays those characteristics towards because it can easily provocate insecurity in others, unintentionally. This sentence seemed to irk me; because at what point does someone have to police themselves to ensure they don't "hurt someone else's feelings"? My generalization is a bit crass, but that's how this sentence came off.

Apologies that you found it irksome! When you have authority (which requires an implicit kind of trust to be established assuming individual A can guide individual B) that establishes a unidirectional responsibility over people. It's a balance. If you want that authority you have to police yourself. I personally do not find myself comfortable in such positions. But I'm aware of the dynamic because it forms a feedback loop. If you show signs of 'weakness' and by 'weakness' I mean taking actions orthogonal to the overarching goal of directing, guiding, teaching, counseling, etc - then the group dynamic can easily devolve into a pedantic sorts of chaos. That doesn't always have to be a bad thing (e.g. good dialogue can result, understanding and new awareness can be established).

My perspective in the U.S. we are living in a time where this kind of authority is desired highly by lots of people because it's being reflected as 'the standard' with the current leadership. The problem is it's fundamentally built on principles that operate like a pyramid scheme. If you want that authority, the more you must conform. The more you conform, the more sameness you see. The more sameness you see, the more you can pretend you are the one with the authority. Carrot, stick, etc.

So if you aren't the literal leader that allows you to be manipulated very easily. I'd rather just have the awareness. My individual autonomy of reasoning is not something to be sacrificed because it goes down to my own personal core and it is fundamentally vital for me to believe I am sane, which is absolutely essential when I have time to myself to think for myself (not to mention essential for survival, I reason for a living - software). It's clearly easy to get caught in the waves of group thinking. People all make mistakes.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#55
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everything is a mental health condition these days. It's practical because if you have a condition, you can be sold a bunch of products and services you did not need in the first place! Progress. More seriously, the explosion of conditions not based on anything tangible (pseudo, unvalidated criteria) and supported by health professionals trying to capitalize on it is the real issue. It becomes a serious issue when…

And everybody has cancer because oncologists love treating patients and drug manufacturers love selling chemo drugs. If you start thinking that way, almost every profession can be seen under a negative light.

That's the problem with mental health care though. Almost every behavior can be seen under a negative light. It doesn't mean it's a negative behavior.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#56
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything is a mental health condition these days. Honestly I think the mental health care industry is getting nervous over how complex, diverse and non-trivial it is to understand minds. It's easy for the field to operate on the premise 'but these poor people, we are trying to help them!'. It's at the least, a bit absurd to be hypercritical over every little detail of thinking, acting, behaving, processing, etc and…

> It seems more that one has to be cautious with who one displays those characteristics towards because it can easily provocate insecurity in others, unintentionally. This sentence seemed to irk me; because at what point does someone have to police themselves to ensure they don't "hurt someone else's feelings"? My generalization is a bit crass, but that's how this sentence came off.

I was taught that I should care about that and if I dont, I am lacking self co trol and rude and that is wrong. And practically speaking, if you hurt peoples feelings they will retaliate one way or the other or avoid you. Especially insecure people.

Controlling what you say is seen as bad thing online, but it is a thing that majority of people in real world do constantly and are expected to.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#57
post #56
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems more that one has to be cautious with who one displays those characteristics towards because it can easily provocate insecurity in others, unintentionally. This sentence seemed to irk me; because at what point does someone have to police themselves to ensure they don't "hurt someone else's feelings"? My generalization is a bit crass, but that's how this sentence came off.

I was taught that I should care about that and if I dont, I am lacking self co trol and rude and that is wrong. And practically speaking, if you hurt peoples feelings they will retaliate one way or the other or avoid you. Especially insecure people. Controlling what you say is seen as bad thing online, but it is a thing that majority of people in real world do constantly and are expected to.

I would be careful about the word 'retaliate'. People internalize information differently. If you hurt someone's feelings, they may internalize that, try to reason out exactly what the problem is, and then accidentally project those feelings onto someone random because emotional and empathetic exhaustion is a thing that can happen to anyone. The reason such individuals exist and do such phenomena is because they don't want to hurt anyone.

That's not being insecure in the individual self. Victim mentality ascribes intent. There isn't always intent. Just being human, and not perfect.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#58
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A perfectionist is someone with more exigence than talent. My dictionary defines 'exigence' (which I had not encountered before) as "an urgent need or demand", and I find that hard to parse. Is either of the parses "… who is more demanding than talented" or (like "grasp exceeds reach") "… whose demands exceed his or her talent" correct? If not, would you mind clarifying?

> (which I had not encountered before) Me neither, in this context - though there's the US legal concept of "exigent circumstances" which allows police officers to enter property without a warrant if they believe a crime is in progress.

> Me neither, in this context - though there's the US legal concept of "exigent circumstances" which allows police officers to enter property without a warrant if they believe a crime is in progress.

Indeed, I had encountered 'exigency' and so had some idea of the general idea—just never 'exigence'.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#59
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was taught that I should care about that and if I dont, I am lacking self co trol and rude and that is wrong. And practically speaking, if you hurt peoples feelings they will retaliate one way or the other or avoid you. Especially insecure people. Controlling what you say is seen as bad thing online, but it is a thing that majority of people in real world do constantly and are expected to.

I would be careful about the word 'retaliate'. People internalize information differently. If you hurt someone's feelings, they may internalize that, try to reason out exactly what the problem is, and then accidentally project those feelings onto someone random because emotional and empathetic exhaustion is a thing that can happen to anyone. The reason such individuals exist and do such phenomena is because they don'…

Point taken. There are many different reactions to being hurt and possible backslash about me is just one of them.

I may also end up doing harm to hurt person, either because my hurt will influence them to their detriment (they will internalize my angry outburst etc) or because of how third parties will perceive them due to what I say.

I did not meant retaliation as purely bad act on the side of hurt person. It may he just answering in kind. People who don't stand up to insults end up being bullied. If I don't have to care about hurting their feelings, they don't have to care about mine.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#60
This article reflects a view that "perfectionism" is the cause of anxiety, depression, and social insecurity. It seems more likely that self-destructive perfectionism (since positive perfectionism is framed here as well) is a result of anxiety and social insecurity, not the other way around.
Post reply on HN