[halfcreative]

I feel like for me, reading and writing articles like this are a major source of distractions. I often find myself reading articles like this, lessons of self-improvement and tips of motivation and ways to be a better programmer, instead of doing what actually makes me a better programmer (actually programming). To extend upon the article, I feel like one of the easiest distractions from self improvement is constantly reading about self improvement. Not to say that the lessons in these articles are a sham, but that there's a point where the idea of and dream of improving yourself becomes a dangerously stealthy distraction.

[moksly]

The thing about working on yourself is that it’s actually work. Reading an article, or a book on behaviour, self-improvement and what else doesn’t actually change you any more than reading Harry Potter does.

It’s the years of applying Zen Buddhism, scheduling your chores or staring at the mirror telling yourself you’re a great person that changes you.

I know because I recently recorded from a major depression and anxiety, and everything that I’ve done that has actually helped, like lying to myself in the mirror, or convincing myself no-one on the train was actually judging me, took 6+ months to have a real lasting effect.

It’s the same with distractions. Just look at your screen time spent on your smartphone today. It’s probably a couple of hours by the time you go to bed. Like it is for the rest of us. Most of that time is frankly wasted, you know it. I know it. But reading a self-improvement article about how cutting down screen time is healthy for us isn’t actually going to change our behaviour one bit. Maybe for a day or two, but not next week and certainly not next month.

[mchan889]

"The thing about working on yourself is that it’s actually work. Reading an article, or a book on behaviour, self-improvement and what else doesn’t actually change you any more than reading Harry Potter does."

This is well put, and I think part of the reason so much self-improvement material is drivel. Generally, I've noticed that some of the most pathological people are the most into 'self-improvement' as an idea. That being said, their brand of 'self-improvement' generally does not extend beyond reading and quoting books by various gurus.

On the flip-side, those I've met who are actually highly motivated and disciplined, have never picked up one of those guru books.

Reading up on something is one thing, and in many cases, it's an important first step. There's no way to start using a new language without reading something. That being said, simply reading is not enough. On top of that, what you read has to be actionable. The self-improvement platitudes are not actionable. Reading a book on Python does not turn you into a python developer. Why should reading a guru book turn you into one?

[afarrell]

> I've noticed that some of the most pathological people are the most into 'self-improvement' as an idea.

I've noticed that some of the people who spend the most time paying attention to their blood sugar are diabetic.

[mchan889]

My point is more that they are checking their blood sugar levels without doing anything about it.

[afarrell]

hard things are hard.

[xouse]

The way I look at it, information is a force multiplier on action. If there's no action then 50 times zero is still zero.

[mlthoughts2018]

But then if there’s no information, zero times 50 is still zero.

[the_af]

I'm not sure I agree, because the situation is in my opinion not symmetrical.

Work without reading about it: might work, and often does. Reading about it without doing the work: way less useful.

[mlthoughts2018]

My view is the opposite, basically the adage “measure twice, cut once.”

Work without research often is actively harmful in addition to failing and wasting time & resources. Research at least improves knowledge while not wasting other resources besides time.

[the_af]

In science, engineering and coding, I agree!

However, I felt the context of this conversation was self-improvement though. In this particular context, it's easier to get things done without reading any motivational books/articles (in fact, most people get things done without reading about how to self motivate), and the contrary -- reading self-improvement articles -- doesn't mean anything if you don't do the actual work.

Let me quote the initial post of this subthread, which is the sentiment I agree with:

> "The thing about working on yourself is that it’s actually work. Reading an article, or a book on behaviour, self-improvement and what else doesn’t actually change you any more than reading Harry Potter does."

[disgruntledphd2]

Spend a week in the lab to save a day in the library?

[the_af]

I should have been clearer: I was talking about motivational or self-improvement sort of books and articles, as is the topic of TFA.

I wouldn't try it with lab work, though pioneering work sometimes was that way ;)

[maxwebdev]

Worked for Edison

[SkyMarshal]

Once you've read enough philosophy and psychology (both academic and pop), articles like this start becoming repetitive. You realize Jean Beaudrillard was right, and in the post-modern world there truly is nothing new under the sun, everything is just a variation of a variation of a variation of something that came before. A better use of your (professional development) time is thinking about and writing actual code.

[iambrj]

“The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato” - Alfred North Whitehead

[greyvmatter]

Programming isn't necessarily the best way to get better at programming, there are a bunch of related skills that also need to be improved. Thinking about how you program and behave as a human will unlock many doors

[jwilber]

Programming is certainly the best way to get better at programming. Some other things may help improve your ability to program, but there is no substitute for the act itself.

[collyw]

Nah, I am agreement with the poster that you replied to.

Our tech lead is a bit of a diva. He is smart but basically he just programs and doesn't bother with much else. He bangs out code quickly, but it can be buggy and its usually the rest of the team that fix the bugs, keep the infrastructure running, write the tests. He is good at tricky algorithmic stuff. His code is fairly well organised. I don't find his abstractions particularly good. The REST API he created is terrible (poor abstraction) and not RESTful a lot of it uses POST requests, 200 success contains errors. No tests. Terrible at explaining his work to other people. Poor at listening.

Give me a good team player with average ability over a good programmer that lacks the other skills any day.

[croh]

Agree absolutely. I think real problem is our interview process. More focus is given on solving tricky questions than overall craft. In day to day tasks, how many times you have to implement those algorithms ? (I am not against knowing algorithms though). Good code is which performs requirement perfectly and MAINTAINABLE.

Python's PEP 20/zen of python is one of the best guide for craft, imo. It works well for individual programmer as well as for teams.

https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0020/

[andrewzah]

No.

Programming -with intent- is the best way to get better.

If I code up a 10k LOC main.cpp with stringly typed data structures, I'm not really better at programming, am I?

It's like that saying: practice doesn't make perfect, perfect practice makes perfect.

Programming is not literally just typing, as we all know, nor is it simply getting a Thing to compile. A lot of it is educating oneself on different types of data structures, algorithms, math, architectural practices, and so on. Expanding our workbench of tools, as it were.

And -then- putting that into practice when actually programming.

I'm not good at Rust merely because I've worked with Rust a lot; I've also read books on Rust, and I've read many web articles on Rust (found from Rust Weekly) and various libraries, etc.

[nexus2045]

Wholeheartedly agree. Programming is a vague term anyway. Speaking from experience, I could only code basic JavaScript with almost 0 understanding of the more complex fundamentals, but actually build functional SPAs. Repeat that a few years and I've only gotten better at creating apps via programming, but learned little in terms of fundamentals - and so trying to parse some debate on JavaScript would end up going over my head every time.

[williamdclt]

> If I code up a 10k LOC main.cpp with stringly typed data structures, I'm not really better at programming, am I?

I think you are, you are better having done that than before. It might not have been the best improvement you could have gotten out of it, but still.

The relevant XKCD is this one: https://xkcd.com/1414/

[nonbirithm]

An unresolved mental dilemma is a part of a lot of my worry and inaction.

Basically it goes: If you just keep working, will you always keep making progress towards where you want to be?

I don't necessarily mean "if you just put in the effort then you'll succeed," which I do not believe in. People talk about "practice with purpose." You have to know the parts that you need to improve on and correct them if your actual intention is to get better at something. I believe that works better than taking any arbitrary action at all, with the same goal in mind.

So it's not knowing if writing that 10K LoC program actually does help or not. I forget things I've done. I lose interest.

Then I extrapolate from this and think, then there must be some spectrum of things in between that are not practically useful, and if I keep doing them then I will not improve in the ways that I want. I will believe that maybe writing a stringly typed C++ application is just reinforcing bad habits that I will have to expend extra effort to undo later. I then believe if that's the case then I ought to not do that thing at all if I believe it's just going to hinder my progress.

The problem is that this mindset costs me a lot of my action, because I figure if what I'm doing is not beneficial for my skills then I'd better get something else. A lot of the time that "something else" is something less challenging, all the way to nothing productive at all. So I end up believing I'm just coddling myself in an attempt to avoid "wasting time" not really improving.

I think this kind of fallacy stems from a fear of banging my head into a wall expecting to get better at some point without knowing if I'm actually on the right track. At least if someone knowledgeable teaches you they could suggest so. And that fear stems from placing too much value on intellectual success as opposed to enjoying the process. If you only enjoy something on the condition you improve, then it discourages you. I've been discouraged a lot.

It could also be due to divorcing enjoyment of something from improving at it. I simply always care about improving, and if I don't see improvement then I'll lose interest. But some say that people who enjoy things just improve on the basis of doing it at all. I just can't seem to get myself to believe it, though.

[travisjungroth]

1. For each activity that you want to improve in know exactly why you want to improve. If it’s because you hope it’ll be fun later but it’s not fun now you should probably stop. There will be a time it’s less fun than it was in the beginning and you’ll give up then anyway. If it’s to get to do something different on the other side, stop expecting enjoyment and just pay the price.

2. Bias towards action. If you want to start running, just go run. Don’t read about it. Don’t sign up for a race. Don’t buy better shoes. Just go run for a while (or write some code or say all the Spanish words you already know out loud).

3. Spend 10-20% of your training time (do not go outside of this range) on improving your training. This is when you watch that video about your activity. People naturally gravitate towards 0 or 100% of time in planning. “A little bit” is the best but rarely done.

4. Check in with someone better than you on a regular schedule to make sure your training is progressing well. Weekly is very good. This could be a coach, mentor, partner, something like that (not an accountability buddy).

[codersteve]

I think this is a pretty deep statement and I think it reflects the way I feel as well, and probably many others.

It's because we lack confidence in knowing if our system of improvement is going to work and we don't want to waste time.

I think you kind of need to Let Go and enjoy exploring or maybe just take structured online classes that you pay for.

[pritovido]

Applying self-improvement takes time, work and effort.

You are applying it when you change as a result of reading and specially using what you learn. Change is essential, if you do not change anything you are not using it.

It is easier to just (passively) read something than applying it. The problem with reading(or watching videos) is that it can be used as an excuse for procrastination as it is way easier doing something passive that active.

The most interesting thing is that the problem is not in reading. I worked with a kid whose parents were worried as he used videogames to procastinate. They put the console out of the kid's reach and now the kid will just stare at the wall for hours just daydreamming.

So my advice is for you to start applying what one book about procastination says. Select just one good book and start applying it on your life.

It is very important that you just decide and pick one. I don't know "The Now habit" for example.

Write down in a journal the difficulties you face, your emotions while doing so and work over it consistently.

[post_below]

It's ironic that the one of the best forms of self improvement is to get over yourself, while the act of self improvement is often entirely self focused.

I think, though, that the author makes a really valuable core point: Most challenges are hard not because of the subject but because of our approach and perspectives. I can't think of anything important in life that doesn't benefit from the exploration of metacognition.