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

Why Dan Shipper is Wrong about Goals

isaacsukin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 32 posts

Re: Why Dan Shipper is Wrong about Goals

#11

Post by rfugger »

Hmmm... I'm not so sure about this. Looking at the studies he links to, the goals are assigned to the subjects by the researchers, not self-set. When you're doing something for someone else, you don't have the problem of wondering if it's the right thing for you -- you just do it to please/impress the authority figure, something we've all been trained to do from a very young age. The subjects have already decided that whatever token reward they get for participation is worth their time, so they're not worried about whether the task will contribute to their personal growth. They get to feel altruistic for contributing to science.

But when there is no authority figure telling you what to do, it's a whole different game. You wonder whether the pain of growing in a certain direction is worth the future uncertain reward. That's what Dan Shipper's article is about -- not letting those thoughts paralyze you and taking small steps in the right direction without putting too much pressure on yourself. Overly-specific goals in this case can be self-defeating because they can often be set without enough knowledge of the territory you're going into. Trusting yourself to explore and learn before getting into specific goals can be important. Big life goals like personal contentment and peace of mind often can't be made very specific anyway. Who knows what is going to make you happy?

Re: Why Dan Shipper is Wrong about Goals

#14

Post by IceCreamYou »

cbhl wrote: post #10

OP: How do you suggest that people go about setting specific, challenging, and achievable goals? While you've described flaws in Dan Shipper's arguments, you haven't provided concrete advice about what the right thing to do is. I found Jamie Wong's post on negative social incentives[0] to be helpful in motivating oneself once a specific goal has been set, but I still find myself having trouble figuring out what goals…

Great question, and there's a lot to say about it. As with most things, there is no right answer, but here's a starting point:

If you are sitting here thinking "I need some goals. What are some good goals for me?" then you should start by thinking about the things you are good at and the things you enjoy and finding the intersection. Alternatively you can think about things you think you might enjoy that would require learning new skills, or things you might not enjoy as much that could be useful in your life.

Once you have a topic, or a pre-existing non-motivating "do your best" goal, there are a few situations:

1) If you're a complete beginner and need help figuring out what a good project could be, I discussed some some thoughts in a previous post [1]:

  Good beginner projects tend to be more or less copies of things people have done before.
I also recommend reading a how-to book and asking more knowledgeable friends for advice.

2) If you know somewhat more about the topic and you're struggling to get a different, more motivating perspective on a goal, I recommend doing what physicists usually do: putting the hard problem in the context of an even larger problem. To do this, ask why you want to accomplish the goal you're contemplating. (If you don't know why, go to step 1, or maybe you shouldn't be doing it.) I gave an example in the post of moving from "I should work out because that's a good thing to do" to the meta-goal of "I want to look good for beach season." Or you could move from "I want to learn to program because that's a good thing to do" to "I want to build Ticketmaster for my school" (for example).

3) If you just know you're interested in a general topic and are looking for ideas, I have so much to say about this it needs a separate blog post. This is definitely the best place to be.

What other characteristics make a useful goal? Also a topic for another post, but you can probably guess by now that I think one good baseline is whether you know specifically why you're doing it (beyond "it sounds like a good idea") and whether it is measurable enough that you can proudly tell someone specifically what you've accomplished.

[1] http://www.isaacsukin.com/news/2012/08/i-want-learn-programm...

Re: Why Dan Shipper is Wrong about Goals

#16

Post by IceCreamYou »

phildeschaine wrote: post #9

I think you're missing the point of Dan's article. For me, the takeaway from that was "giving yourself too concrete of goals too fast will often lead to abandonment of the entire process to preserve your ego". While I do agree solid goals are important eventually, I agree with Dan's overall point. It's just the idea of getting comfortable with the grip and texture of the rungs at the bottom of the ladder before tryin…

I agree with the idea that if you know nothing about a topic, it makes sense not to set goals in that space before you know whether those goals will be achievable or not. But Dan's advice is given with the caveat that "The advice from now on will assume that you know at a very high level what you like, what you're passionate about, or where you want to go" -- and in any case I disagree with the notion that just trying a task for awhile with no end goals is a good way to accomplish something. (It is, however, a reasonable way to discover possible goals, which may have been more of what Dan was getting at.)

Re: Why Dan Shipper is Wrong about Goals

#17

Post by IceCreamYou »

the_cat_kittles wrote: post #15

Lets not forget that people are heterogenous, and that their response to goals may also be.

Thank you for pointing this out! I was specifically trying not to say there is One True Way of setting goals but rather that science suggests certain kinds of goals work better for most people most of the time. However, I should have been more explicit in saying that no method will work for everyone.

Re: Why Dan Shipper is Wrong about Goals

#18

Post by IceCreamYou »

zsherm wrote: post #12

Do anyone else's eyes hurt after reading that post?

Sorry -- some people struggle with light-on-dark text. I tend to like it (obviously) but I'll probably switch at some point for this reason. I also want to experiment with just making the text larger.

Would be interested in hearing if other people have experienced this issue and had success solving it.

Re: Why Dan Shipper is Wrong about Goals

#20

Post by quorn3000 »

ryanmolden wrote: post #13
xianshou wrote: post #3

Also: Losers have "goals," winners have systems.

And do systems not have end goals? Or do you just set up artifice for entertainments sake?

Maintaining the system is the one goal. But that distance, and that trust, that the system is yours alone, is what works.
Post reply on HN