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

I am nothing

paulbuchheit.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 134 posts

Re: I am nothing

#41

Post by sadlyNess »

paul wrote: post #30
nickmolnar2 wrote: post #13

I'm also reminded of Daniel Dennett's secret to happiness: find something bigger than yourself and devote your life to it. That too allows you to drop your baggage and become 'nothing'. And it's a great way to leave a lasting impact on the world too.

It seems a little ironic that he would copy the standard religious formulation. The problem with this approach is that you may devote your life to the wrong bigger thing and then end up in the middle of a "religious" war.

From what i've seen, we all have something we worship, God or not. This entity is perceived by us to be greater and may or may not benefit us. It's like we're wired to worship, only we have different opinions on the deity.

Re: I am nothing

#42

Post by msg »

paul wrote: post #18
maeon3 wrote: post #14

This is a major component of Christianity. (I'm not preaching here) I thought it was interesting that the non religious world is figuring out things that have been core teachings for the last 2800 years. In the christian world, it is called "taking yourself off the throne and putting another entity on it". The entity that gets put on it is variable, but the constant is that you are not on it.

That sounds like a very different concept actually. Worshiping a king seems more likely to narrow your perception.

Before we get too caught up in "what Christians believe" let's point out that it is a big tent religion and the story is much more complicated.

Perhaps, as Chesterton said, GP is being "as narrow as the universe".

When I read your essay I immediately thought of the negative way, which is the strain of Christian philosophy that denies affirmative statements about God, and denies to some extent settled knowledge.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophatic_theology

There is also an equal and opposite affirmative way that takes God as knowable not literally, but by analogy.

And this to me is the missing element in the essay. This egoless vehicle that we are cleaning so carefully, where are we to drive it? What shall we use to measure improvement? How will we understand progress?

Re: I am nothing

#43

Post by 0x0x0x »

sadlyNess wrote: post #41
paul wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems a little ironic that he would copy the standard religious formulation. The problem with this approach is that you may devote your life to the wrong bigger thing and then end up in the middle of a "religious" war.

From what i've seen, we all have something we worship, God or not. This entity is perceived by us to be greater and may or may not benefit us. It's like we're wired to worship, only we have different opinions on the deity.

The only thing is life I worship are my kids. They are, consequently, both greater than I and the direct benefit has already been apparent. With continued effort, it is also likely to grow.

:)

Re: I am nothing

#44

Post by dkurth »

paul wrote: post #19
dkurth wrote: post #16

On the one hand, he says, "if we aren't changing for the better, then we are just slowly decaying," suggesting that there is such a thing as "better." On the other hand, he talks about "returning to zero expectations" and being "nothing." I conclude that Paul wants to be a better nothing. Or possibly that he is slowly decaying. I'm not sure you can be nothing and also have a standard for getting better.

It's about finding an unconstrained perspective. Perhaps re-read the last paragraph?

Fair enough, I re-read it.

I'm thinking about "perspective" -- the word suggests a relationship to something bigger. For example, when an artist draws with perspective, there is a point on the horizon toward which lines extend. Removing constraints may be a useful exercise, but removing all constraints would, in a sense, remove all perspective as well. So I think I'm looking for a perspective that's constrained by what's true, rather than one that's unconstrained.

I guess this is what I find inconsistent. There's this idea: "Until we let go of our mental images of who we are or who we should be, our vision remains clouded by expectation." But in the same paragraph, there's a notion of "self improvement." If I remove all expectations of who I should be, how can I measure my self improvement (assuming I intend to improve myself in the first place)?

There's the potential here to replace stressing out over a question like "am I a good father?" with stressing over things like "am I nothing? Am I improving? Am I myself yet?" Might this be just another "path to insanity?" Just a thought.

Re: I am nothing

#46

Post by carterac »

If you like this idea but want to work more on truly internalizing it, I highly recommend reading 'A New Earth' by Eckart Tolle. I read it twice (on my iPhone on the subway to work) and it made a big difference in terms of becoming happier and more effective in business and with friends and family.

Re: I am nothing

#47

Post by srjk »

I am rarely moved to comment on a post. This one seems to be especially thoughtful and sincere.

I understood the core message to be we shouldn't let labels that define some aspects of who we are constrain us.

Or, in programming terms: mixins not class hierarchies :)

Favourite quote: "True self improvement requires becoming a better version of our selves, not a lesser version of someone else."

Re: I am nothing

#48

Post by JDulin »

Awesome essay from Paul, very insightful.

This mindset is good at not only helping yourself become yourself, but placing the best people in your life.

If you spend your entire life trying to please everyone you meet, decide who you should be friends with and who you shouldn't, and become a person that others will like more, you will ultimately not make friends who you would have by just being yourself. And those are the friends you want most.

Perhaps even worse, you could waste endless amounts of time on people who you think you should be friends with or have in your life, but really shouldn't. Sooner or later, the relationships with these people that you built on the foundation of some artificial idea of yourself will crumble. If you know that you are nothing, then become yourself, you will be surprised how many amazing friends you will find in your life.

Re: I am nothing

#49

Post by Eliezer » 

  I have abandoned my path.
  I have forsaken my role.
  I have forgotten my name.
  I have lost my soul.
-- unpublished fiction

Re: I am nothing

#50

Post by canistr »

zitterbewegung wrote: post #39

This is why I like to do science. I feel like I am constantly learning. I know that I know nothing and I can only know a little bit more by science. When I acknowledged my limitations and just sat down and calculated then I performed better. Sort of a zen like way of thinking. I know that I know nothing and instead I must just calculate and manipulate symbols.

Conversely, this is why I like reading things in the realm of philosophy and political science. As an engineer by trade, I feel there's a more freeform in those areas and I tend to read philosophy and political science to escape and relax. Perhaps I became an engineer out of expectation and my true nature would have led me to the liberal arts. There's nothing wrong with either science or liberal arts, as long as one is nothing and knows who they are and studies what interest them.
Post reply on HN