Live data from Hacker News

Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

theobjectivestandard.com

11–20 of 31 posts

Re: Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

#11

Steve Jobs was an interesting man who led an unusual and great life, and I have a lot of respect for him for what he's done, but I don't think his "philosophy of life" is very practical for average people. By his late 20s, he was at the point of never having to work again. He could work for fun. This doesn't take anything away from him; he worked very hard and produced excellent products. My point is that what worked…

>> If I have kids, I'm not going to tell them to "follow their dreams" or "do what you love, and everything else will take care of itself". We don't live in a good enough world for that. It's just not practical advice.

There's more to it than that.

If you're going to do something, do it as best as you can, otherwise don't do it so you don't waste your time.

To do something as best as you can,... "you have to get it. You have to really grok what it’s all about. It takes a passionate commitment to really thoroughly understand something, chew it up, not just quickly swallow it. Most people don’t take the time to do that."

"When you're a carpenter making a beautiful chest of drawers, you're not going to use a piece of plywood on the back, even though it faces the wall and nobody will ever see it. You'll know it's there, so you're going to use a beautiful piece of wood on the back. For you to sleep well at night, the aesthetic, the quality, has to be carried all the way through."

So how is this practical?

Let's say you're studying a econometrics major in university like I was doing. You know the introductory course's exams will be easy so you skip classes and just cram in the final week. You score 89/100 in the exam. Well good on you, but you didn't really grok what it's all about. You repeat this for the next semester and you score 78/100. Still a good mark, considering you didn't take the time to thoroughly understand it. However, this tactic will stop working once you get into higher level courses, where it depends on your total mastery of the fundamentals. You cannot just "cram" in the final week anymore.

I've only recently been able to understand why I was so good in the Engineering part of my "Double Degree in Software Engineering & Commerce", and so bad at the other. I don't spend much time on either's classes and cram only in the final weeks before the exam, but because I spend the time I saved self-learning the bits of engineering that interests me - even though it doesn't match the courses I'm studying, a few semesters down the road all the dots comes together. I didn't self learn anything econometrics related (besides stock trading, some might call it gambling, though) in my time saved from not concentrating on my econometrics classes. I did well at first, but now I am experiencing serious headwind and am not sleeping well at night.

This is why I am switching to another commerce major, so I can get another chance to really understand the fundamentals. If I'm going to complete a degree, I am going to (from now on) do it as best as I can. It means I will spend a lot more effort per mark that I will get. But I know I spent the time to throughly understand it. For me to sleep well at night, the quality has to be carried all the way through.

I'm sorry if you had to cringe at some of what I wrote, but I felt I had to write it.

Re: Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

#12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem odd, especially since objectivists are about as second-handed as it gets. "Objectivism" is not a philosophy; it's a support group in New York for emotionally broken rich people.

Can you explain how objectivists are second-handed?

Most "objectivists" are intellectually unoriginal. They've taken Ayn Rand's philosophy literally because it sounds good to an adolescent mind and is illustrated with reasonably well-crafted stories, not on any actual merits.

One of the most obvious failings of objectivism is that it doesn't even make sense on its own terms. Ayn Rand's "productive elite" had a mix of artists, intellectuals, scientists, and business people in it. Yet objectivism as usually deployed is nothing more than apologism for the existing, status quo, corporate elite: one that houses few intellectuals and no artists. Ayn Rand conflates economic and intellectual excellence despite loads of evidence (in the society we actually have) to the contrary.

I would actually prefer socialism to corporate capitalism driven by private-sector social-climbing and bureaucracy. Socialism may tax the most productive in order to feed mediocrities. Ok, fine. Guilty as charged. But the status quo in America is to have mediocrities in positions of incredible power and influence and that's worse.

Re: Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

#13

Steve Jobs was an interesting man who led an unusual and great life, and I have a lot of respect for him for what he's done, but I don't think his "philosophy of life" is very practical for average people. By his late 20s, he was at the point of never having to work again. He could work for fun. This doesn't take anything away from him; he worked very hard and produced excellent products. My point is that what worked…

With respect, I submit my comments/arguments:

> I don't think his "philosophy of life" is very practical for average people.

I think that the notion of people as "average" is the root of the problem. There are no average people. There are individuals, whom may choose to become average by leading an average life. There are other individuals, whom may choose or be coerced into being less than average. And on the other side of average, you have those who by virtue of their choices and the guidance they receive from their mentors, choose to live a better than average life - and follow all or part of the "philosophy of life" that Jobs espoused.

>My point is that what worked for him doesn't work for most people.

It can work, if people choose to live life based on such a philosophy.

>If you are a person like Steve Jobs in an average position, you're looking at a string of 6- to 12-month jobs and eventual unemployment once your CV looks like Ypres.

There are two issues with this statement: average by whose measure, and whether one chooses to be average.

>otherwise, you'll be mired in mediocrity because that's what most people like and want. But if you're a normal person who has to pay the bills, to throw all of that social stupidity to the wind is putting the cart a bit before the horse.

I despise mediocrity with a passion. I hire people based on the best that they offer, and fire them based on what they don't. And I know plenty of people who think similarly. It is how I've lived my life.

>But if you're a normal person who has to pay the bills, to throw all of that social stupidity to the wind is putting the cart a bit before the horse.

I completely agree that it is "social stupidity" - and that is why I spend hours rooting it out by sharing posts like these :)

Re: Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

#14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how objectivists are second-handed?

Most "objectivists" are intellectually unoriginal. They've taken Ayn Rand's philosophy literally because it sounds good to an adolescent mind and is illustrated with reasonably well-crafted stories, not on any actual merits. One of the most obvious failings of objectivism is that it doesn't even make sense on its own terms. Ayn Rand's "productive elite" had a mix of artists, intellectuals, scientists, and business pe…

>Most "objectivists" are intellectually unoriginal. They've taken Ayn Rand's philosophy literally because it sounds good to an adolescent mind and is illustrated with reasonably well-crafted stories, not on any actual merits.

Do you realize that some of the leading Objectivist philosophers have studied all other schools of philosophy, can speak about it freely, and understand it deeply? Would you posit that said Objectivist philosophers have adolescent minds?

Are you familiar with Mr. John Allison IV? He is an Objectivist and former CEO of BB&T (BB&T Corporation (Branch Banking & Trust) (NYSE: BBT) is an American bank with assets of $157 billion (March 2011)).

"Reasonably well crafted stories, with no actual merits"?

>Yet objectivism as usually deployed is nothing more than apologism for the existing, status quo, corporate elite: one that houses few intellectuals and no artists

You are absolutely wrong and have said nothing factual. No true Objectivist apologizes for the corporate elite - especially if said corporate elite earned its elite status through pandering to government and the status quo. As for artists, are you familiar with, for example: http://www.cordair.com/? Would you not call that art?

>I would actually prefer socialism to corporate capitalism driven by private-sector social-climbing and bureaucracy. Socialism may tax the most productive in order to feed mediocrities.

I would prefer neither - because neither system protects the individual. Both systems eventually fail - one being far more nefarious in its crony and duplicitous ways. At least the Socialists didn't hide what they were after.

Re: Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

#15

Steve Jobs was an interesting man who led an unusual and great life, and I have a lot of respect for him for what he's done, but I don't think his "philosophy of life" is very practical for average people. By his late 20s, he was at the point of never having to work again. He could work for fun. This doesn't take anything away from him; he worked very hard and produced excellent products. My point is that what worked…

My father likes to use the quote, "Whether you think you can, or you think you can't - you're right."

This is a Henry Ford quote and seems to apply to this situation. You can either believe you can 'follow your dreams' or believe following dreams is reserved for a select few others.

Jobs didn't say everyone can become a billionaire. He said everyone can follow their dreams. He's right.

>> By his late 20s, he was at the point of never having to work again. He could work for fun.

He had been working for fun from the beginning.

Re: Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

#16
post #11

Steve Jobs was an interesting man who led an unusual and great life, and I have a lot of respect for him for what he's done, but I don't think his "philosophy of life" is very practical for average people. By his late 20s, he was at the point of never having to work again. He could work for fun. This doesn't take anything away from him; he worked very hard and produced excellent products. My point is that what worked…

>> If I have kids, I'm not going to tell them to "follow their dreams" or "do what you love, and everything else will take care of itself". We don't live in a good enough world for that. It's just not practical advice. There's more to it than that. If you're going to do something, do it as best as you can, otherwise don't do it so you don't waste your time. To do something as best as you can,... "you have to get it.…

If you're going to do something, do it as best as you can, otherwise don't do it so you don't waste your time.

This sounds good and I like the work ethic, but it's not the most strategic approach.

There's something immensely rewarding about doing a really great job at something, about building something that's truly great. Aesthetic completion, perhaps? I would personally much rather work in that way as well: always able to take the time to write great code, never having to do deal with legacy bullshit or ill-considered external demands that compromise the quality. But is that practical? Not for most people. Steve Jobs could pull it off. He was rich and didn't need to keep his job at Apple (one that he'd already lost in '85) so he could actually do great work, and insist on the same from others.

The strategic approach is to pretty much stop at "good enough" and move on to something else. That's what most people do at work, and I don't like it but I understand why people work that way. Doing one really great thing is much more rewarding, but it doesn't build a CV, and it only makes a career if a person has a lot more creative control than most of us get. CVs and reputations are built by sticking as many fingers in as many pies as possible.

School doesn't prepare people for this. I've worked at a number of companies that consider a 3.9+ GPA a negative in hiring because people with excellent grades tend to be those who insist on doing great work, not the mediocre work (in more quantity per unit time) that most jobs actually require.

Re: Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

#17

Steve Jobs was an interesting man who led an unusual and great life, and I have a lot of respect for him for what he's done, but I don't think his "philosophy of life" is very practical for average people. By his late 20s, he was at the point of never having to work again. He could work for fun. This doesn't take anything away from him; he worked very hard and produced excellent products. My point is that what worked…

With respect, I submit my comments/arguments: > I don't think his "philosophy of life" is very practical for average people. I think that the notion of people as "average" is the root of the problem. There are no average people. There are individuals, whom may choose to become average by leading an average life. There are other individuals, whom may choose or be coerced into being less than average. And on the other…

By "average", I meant "of average means". Whether there are "average people" is a silly argument. When I said "average people", I meant "people of average means".

If "average people" means "people of average talent and ambition", then we're talking about people who neither have the talent nor desire to do what Jobs did, so the discussion's irrelevant.

Re: Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

#18

Steve Jobs was an interesting man who led an unusual and great life, and I have a lot of respect for him for what he's done, but I don't think his "philosophy of life" is very practical for average people. By his late 20s, he was at the point of never having to work again. He could work for fun. This doesn't take anything away from him; he worked very hard and produced excellent products. My point is that what worked…

My father likes to use the quote, "Whether you think you can, or you think you can't - you're right." This is a Henry Ford quote and seems to apply to this situation. You can either believe you can 'follow your dreams' or believe following dreams is reserved for a select few others. Jobs didn't say everyone can become a billionaire. He said everyone can follow their dreams. He's right. >> By his late 20s, he was at t…

And he was an adopted child, whom wasn't exactly born into a super-privileged family:

"Jobs was adopted by the family of Paul Jobs and Clara Jobs (née Hagopian) who moved to Mountain View, California when he was five years old.[1][2] Paul and Clara later adopted a daughter, Patti. Paul Jobs, a machinist for a company that made lasers, taught his son rudimentary electronics and how to work with his hands.[1] His adoptive mother was an accountant.[18] Asked in a 1995 interview what he wanted to pass on to his children, Jobs replied, "Just to try to be as good a father to them as my father was to me. I think about that every day of my life." When asked about his "adoptive parents," Jobs replied emphatically that Paul and Clara Jobs "were my parents." [18]" -From the Wikipedia article on S. Jobs

Re: Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

#19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With respect, I submit my comments/arguments: > I don't think his "philosophy of life" is very practical for average people. I think that the notion of people as "average" is the root of the problem. There are no average people. There are individuals, whom may choose to become average by leading an average life. There are other individuals, whom may choose or be coerced into being less than average. And on the other…

By "average", I meant "of average means". Whether there are "average people" is a silly argument. When I said "average people", I meant "people of average means". If "average people" means "people of average talent and ambition", then we're talking about people who neither have the talent nor desire to do what Jobs did, so the discussion's irrelevant.

Doesn't the life of Steve Jobs discredit your argument?

From what I understand of his life story, he came from "average means" and achieved his success through his own creative capabilities.

Re: Steve Jobs’ Philosophy of Life

#20
"He embraced first-handedness or independent thinking: a primary orientation not toward others’ opinions, but toward reality as you see it."

This is such a simple concept, but it is probably the most rarely employed thought process in all of society.

Original thoughts are rare and usually lucky. No reason to look down on anyone for being original - there's nothing new under the sun. Independent thinking, however, is far more rare then it has to be.

Post reply on HN