Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The intolerable rise of perfectionism

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 103 posts

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#91

Post by slededit »

naasking wrote: post #88
slededit wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is evidence of a genetic cause for night owlism: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121116124551.h... Further nobody questions the legitimacy of "early risers" and blames it on lifestyle. In fact most consider it a positive and something to aspire to. When you go your whole life having to dispel the initial impression of laziness due to your natural sleep rythmn it becomes personal. I'm fortunate tha…

> Further nobody questions the legitimacy of "early risers" and blames it on lifestyle. Because being an early riser is adaptive. We're not at all well adapted to operating at night given our sensory apparatus, we're quite well adapted to operate in daylight. Furthermore, humans aren't genetically predetermined creatures, it's entirely possible to change virtually all of our behaviours and inclinations with the right…

Its crazy in this day and age its considered OK to call perfectly healthy people "maladapted" because they don't conform to societies view of a normal sleep schedule. Treating people this way causes real damage to actual humans.

Second sleeps used to be very common with people getting useful work and liesure done during the time between. Activity at night is normal.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#92

Post by naasking »

slededit wrote: post #91
naasking wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Further nobody questions the legitimacy of "early risers" and blames it on lifestyle. Because being an early riser is adaptive. We're not at all well adapted to operating at night given our sensory apparatus, we're quite well adapted to operate in daylight. Furthermore, humans aren't genetically predetermined creatures, it's entirely possible to change virtually all of our behaviours and inclinations with the right…

Its crazy in this day and age its considered OK to call perfectly healthy people "maladapted" because they don't conform to societies view of a normal sleep schedule. Treating people this way causes real damage to actual humans. Second sleeps used to be very common with people getting useful work and liesure done during the time between. Activity at night is normal.

> Its crazy in this day and age its considered OK to call perfectly healthy people "maladapted" because they don't conform to societies view of a normal sleep schedule.

"Maladapted" in this case literally means "poorly suited to functioning in typical jobs". Society's normal sleep schedule is exactly what makes night owls maladapted to most jobs.

Of course, you're incorrectly reading some sort of moral judgment in this classification, as you have with many other posts. You should try to be a little more impartial when discussing basic facts.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#93

Post by everdev »

slededit wrote: post #84
everdev wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, absolutely nothing wrong with being who you are. But I think there's nothing wrong with people who change their diet, exercise, environment, etc. to develop a new habit.

Its not a "habit", its hard-coded and there is strong evidence that forcing your sleep schedule to change has negative health consequences. Underlying all this is an insinuation that if you just eat better and exercised you'd wake up at a normal time. Night owls do get exercise and eat healthily. This advice never seems to be applied to early risers, it comes from a cultural perception of night owls as defective.

Maybe. I was a night owl for 30+ years, but then had the same experience as OC when my other habits changed my sleep cycle changed too without any of the grogginess and frustration I had before when I only tried to change my sleep pattern.

Bodies are different though so no doubt our experiences may be very different.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#94

Post by darpa_escapee »

Raidion wrote: post #78

I think the problem I have with perfectionism, is that in a fairly connected world of 7+ billion people, the people that get "acclaim" are truly some of the most talented/lucky/good people in the world. You never see mediocrity anymore, everyone has curated Instagram and Facebook feeds of their best moments. If you do see it, it's the process of something like America's Got Talent where it's laughed at. Dave Grohl of…

If you ever get the chance to peek behind the curtain of these superstar online personas, it's refreshing to say the least.

People like to imagine that most gained popularity organically, but there's a lot of expensive marketing, gaming of algorithms and outright cheating (paying for followers/comments/reviews/likes, paying other personas to promote their own without disclosure etc).

It's a reminder that there are probably a lot of very capable, talented people out there who aren't as dedicated to making an online presence for themselves.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#96

Post by slededit »

naasking wrote: post #92
slededit wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its crazy in this day and age its considered OK to call perfectly healthy people "maladapted" because they don't conform to societies view of a normal sleep schedule. Treating people this way causes real damage to actual humans. Second sleeps used to be very common with people getting useful work and liesure done during the time between. Activity at night is normal.

> Its crazy in this day and age its considered OK to call perfectly healthy people "maladapted" because they don't conform to societies view of a normal sleep schedule. "Maladapted" in this case literally means "poorly suited to functioning in typical jobs". Society's normal sleep schedule is exactly what makes night owls maladapted to most jobs. Of course, you're incorrectly reading some sort of moral judgment in th…

9-5 is an arbitrary restriction on a typical office job. The majority of us no longer perform shift work on the factory floor which was the original impetus for this societal norm.

You are recounting society as it exists today which is abnormal in a historical context. I am speaking of a society that could exist. One where 1/5th the population is not needlessly forced through life exhausted and under performing. Not only would productivity be higher, but we'd get more use out of our otherwise vacant buildings at night. Rush hour would be greatly diminished if not everyone had to arrive at work exactly the same time.

Flex hours are a simple and mainstream solution that more companies should adopt. But it has to start with an appreciation that night owls are not "defective" or as you say, "maladapted".

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#97

Post by slededit »

everdev wrote: post #93
slededit wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not a "habit", its hard-coded and there is strong evidence that forcing your sleep schedule to change has negative health consequences. Underlying all this is an insinuation that if you just eat better and exercised you'd wake up at a normal time. Night owls do get exercise and eat healthily. This advice never seems to be applied to early risers, it comes from a cultural perception of night owls as defective.

Maybe. I was a night owl for 30+ years, but then had the same experience as OC when my other habits changed my sleep cycle changed too without any of the grogginess and frustration I had before when I only tried to change my sleep pattern. Bodies are different though so no doubt our experiences may be very different.

I'm happy it worked for you, but I consider us victims of a society that arbitrarily enforces waking hours. There's no reason a programmer can't work noon to 8 if that works better with their sleep schedule. Ditto for most other office jobs. Core hours are reasonable compromises.

On the one hand our lives will be easier if we just got with the program. But things will never get better if we acquiesce.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#98

Post by nikofeyn »

Raidion wrote: post #78

I think the problem I have with perfectionism, is that in a fairly connected world of 7+ billion people, the people that get "acclaim" are truly some of the most talented/lucky/good people in the world. You never see mediocrity anymore, everyone has curated Instagram and Facebook feeds of their best moments. If you do see it, it's the process of something like America's Got Talent where it's laughed at. Dave Grohl of…

i don’t understand this viewpoint at all. you and i must live in a completely different world, as i feel i am surrounded by mediocrity with myself included. everywhere you look are humans acting more like humans the animal instead humans the “thinking being”.

and i feel, more often than not, people in the positions of acclaim and power got there more by luck and being in the right place at the right time while having supplemented this with hard work and some intelligence, and not the other way around. it is much more difficult to exist as a person who thinks outside the box versus one who thinks inside the box but knows the right people.

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#99

Post by ruok0101 »

chapium wrote: post #79
ruok0101 wrote: post #77

Maybe I've been working with too many millennials lately, but personally, I wish more people I worked with were perfectionists! My subjective observation is overall commitment to quality has generally decrease over the last decade of my career. I know I have OCD tendencies, and I've found that if I can harness it properly (mostly by just being aware of when I am in a obsessive state) I can really internalize the topi…

Are you sure its not Millennials but instead your expectations? Perhaps they are at their desks wondering why you are so commited to low value details.

Yep, pretty sure its them :)

Re: The intolerable rise of perfectionism

#100

Post by ekianjo »

emaginniss wrote: post #49
ekianjo wrote: 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.

Cancer is nothing like that. It's a very tangible and measurable family of diseases. The explosion of "conditions" is all about pseudo-Neuroscience.
Post reply on HN