[vhiremath4]

> Every action you take isn’t a vote for the type of person you wish to become, it is a vote taken by the person you are.

This is patently false. If you start smoking cigarettes occasionally and start doing it more, you are becoming more of a smoker. The actions you take or don't take are the clearest input to the person you become. It's true that this is also the person you are, but that distinction seems meaningless if you're trying to become someone better (whatever better means to you).

On a more general note (and this is what you are saying), you can both prioritize the things you need to do to progress and the time you need for enjoying yourself and your current life. These things are only mutually exclusive if you're pushing past your personal limits and there's a lot of inputs to that equation and whether that's worth it to each individual.

So my next question is: why such a strong aversion to people improving themselves? There is no problem with being competitive. However competitive you want to be, be. Do it for yourself. Don't know the author of the post, but people who are hyper competitive usually aren't telling others to also be hyper competitive (unless it's a Gary V or someone similar). From my experience, they're usually just doing their own thing.

[mikkergp]

If the only reason a person is having a conversation with me is so they can be a better conversationalist tomorrow, than they can fuck off. I worked out today, I ate healthy today, I worked hard and did chores for my family, and praticed my art forms and I did it all for today. Who knows what tomorrow will bring. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with planning for tomorrow, but there is a problem with seeing "every action you take" that way.

Why do you sense this as a strong aversion to people improving themselves, and not a strong aversion to people trying to guilt people into seeing only one mindset to self improvement?

[1659447091]

I believe it's more along the lines of "I'm having a conversation with you today because I value and care about you and our friendship etc; I want to be the kind of person that shows up for others and leaves people I interact with in a better place/mood/etc."

Instead of being the person not aware of their moods and carrying resentment over the smallest slights so they end up bitching about it to everyone. If one never chooses, or "vote", for the positive/uplifting inter/action, then they are "voting" to keep being the person who always has something to complain about.

Similarly, the smoking example, choose to be someone who cares about their health or the person who could not care less. Better is defined by the user. But either way, it will certainly build, or describe, the type of person they are choosing or "voting" to be.

Though, its really just stating the obvious. The more you do or don't something the more those actions become you. The "votes" on those actions don't have to be overt. It's like they were trying to find a novel way to restate the self-help quote: "Watch your thoughts, they become your words; watch your words, they become your actions; watch your actions, they become your habits; watch your habits, they become your character; watch your character, it becomes your destiny." (-attributed to the usual suspects)

[tamrix]

Some people are so driven towards being productive that they think their time is worth more than others.

Why should I waste my day taking to you when I could be working and being more productive?

Eventually all your relationships, friends family etc are tied down to how much money you will be making with that time as it could be better spent working, making money .

So sure every choice is a vote for an improved you. No one would question such an obvious statement. But the way this is framed, is that every decision should be a productive one, which will net you more income.

So stop wasting your time and be more productive or your self worth is delimiting. Aka productivity porn.

[1659447091]

I can see how it is mostly viewed - even suggested - that way. I agree, these things tend to all nudge or write in a way that silently yells in that same direction for what "productivity" or "improvement" should mean. And I think we can end up taking those hints and running with it. It's exhausting.

What I failed to get across is that, if we read the subjective points with complete neutrality then the only thing really being stated is: what ever your purpose for doing something is the person you continue to become. Which, yea..

However, at its core it can be an actionable, and practical, statement that can simply be a reminder to be intentional in our actions. Advice completely devoid of the subjective judgment of that intent. But the energy needed to clean up the message to that point is not everyone's cup of tea.

[brailsafe]

Yes, I thought this way in my early twenties, and after that phase I learned to identify those (mutable) traits in others as hollow and immature. Often characterized by how arbitrarily they approach moments in life. Counter to this, I make a very deliberate effort to spend as much time as I feasibly can with specific people for no particular reason other than I enjoy their company and I want them to similarly feel like it's a relationship worth having around longer, because that's inherently virtuous. The activity could be arbitrary or specific. If it's specific, then I might choose the person specifically for it, but if the person is specific, then the activity arbitrarily serves the nature of spending time with the person. I'm never arbitrarily spending time with arbitrary people for a specific outcome though.

[vhiremath4]

I strongly agree with this. I think you really have to begin to love the journey if you want to improve at something with slow incremental gains over time. But everyone has to start somewhere, and, honestly speaking, most people don't want to work out. Most people don't want to work hard. Or eat healthy. You have to force yourself initially to see that this is going to lead to you loving to do these things you currently hate.

[karaterobot]

> This is patently false. If you start smoking cigarettes occasionally and start doing it more, you are becoming more of a smoker. The actions you take or don't take are the clearest input to the person you become. It's true that this is also the person you are, but that distinction seems meaningless if you're trying to become someone better (whatever better means to you).

I don't know about 'patently false': it's literally true. The things you do reflect who you are when you do them, the person you are becoming is a hypothetical who does not exist. For example, I am the one splitting hairs in this comment, not the future me who wants to be named world's biggest pedant.

What your example points out is someone who is doing more of something over time. A smoker who smokes more is a trend, not an action.

[stonemetal12]

It is a false dichotomy. Every action you take today is a vote by the you who exists right now. Every action you take today does build the history of the person you are tomorrow. It is not one or the other, but both.

[karaterobot]

Describing any action as a vote about your future identity is a way of thinking about the world. It makes sense within the particular framework this article is presenting, but it is not a universally held belief, and it's not self-evidently true. It's a metaphor.

Here's an example: if you choose not a rob a bank 10,000 times, that's 10,000 votes for not being a bank robber. Then if you choose to rob a bank just one time, you're suddenly a bank robber. 10,000 to 1, the number of votes doesn't actually matter.

That's a silly example, but what it means is that your identity isn't always the result of a bunch of small decisions. Often there's just one "vote", and that is the decision you make, the action you take.

One objection to this may be "but being a bank robber isn't who you are, it's just something you did." If so, I wonder how to square that with the example of becoming more of a smoker by smoking more cigarettes? Can I vote not to be a smoker, even if I smoke a lot of cigarettes? Or to be less of a smoker by smoking more cigarettes? That doesn't make sense to me.

Anyway, hope this clarifies my objection: "actions are votes about who you will become" is a metaphorical explanation, not a literal one, so that comment way upthread is not patently false in my opinion, even if it's arguable.

[MichaelZuo]

Choosing not to rob a bank 10 000 times still means you are a potential bank robber, like everyone else on this planet. At the 10 001 choice where it actually happens, this simply turns the potential to actual.

[Ruthalas]

That is entirely correct, but it strains the voting metaphor a lot.

[wizofaus]

> There is no problem with being competitive.

I'd say there definitely is if you do everything in life that way. You seem to be assuming it's possible to be meaningful competitive without it affecting how you interact with other people. But competitive-minded people often make it abundantly clear to those around them how much they're "winning" and even make it a point of pride that others aren't doing so well. So yes, there definitely can be problems with being competitive. But our competitive instinct can be positive motivating force - we've all pushed ourselves that little harder knowing the reward will be a higher spot on the results table. How to combine that with not being an asshole about it seems to be the challenge.

[darkerside]

Salience bias. You don't notice the competitive people who aren't assholes, but there are plenty of them. Some of them are even humble.

[notyourwork]

> The actions you take or don't take are the clearest input to the person you become.

They are the clearest input to the person you *are*. I agree with the OP you replied to.

[P5fRxh5kUvp2th]

One wonders if you created this post to be come a better typist.

[mistermann]

> There is no problem with being competitive.

What if this is not true without exception?

> From my experience, they're usually just doing their own thing.

The "just" seems off - actions can affect the state of the system we all live in, and sometimes these effects are negative.

[cpursley]

> why such a strong aversion to people improving themselves

crab bucket mentality

[rukuu001]

In case people aren’t familiar with crab bucket mentality (I wasn’t) - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality

[Apocryphon]

These trends shift back and forth. A few years ago, certainly a decade ago, everyone was into productivity porn and life hacks and optimizing one's lives. Right now people are just generally burned out after the last couple of years.

[yodsanklai]

> why such a strong aversion to people improving themselves?

It's fine to be competitive or trying to improve. But it seems to me that people reading this type of self-improvement articles are wasting their time (ironic if they want to be more productive).

[s1artibartfast]

>It's true that this is also the person you are, but that distinction seems meaningless if you're trying to become someone better (whatever better means to you)

Do, or do not. There is no try.

This is a meaningful distinction, even if it is a nuanced one. There's a profound difference between focusing on who you want to be tomorrow versus who you want to be today.

One mindset takes you out of the present and is an act of self denial. The other embraces the present and affirms positive self identity.

[stjohnswarts]

Another mindset that gets overused is "always live in the now" . Sometimes you have to stop and assess what direction you're heading with in life...

[s1artibartfast]

It's sad that the idea of living in the now has been co-oped to mean acting impulsively and stupidity.

Being present has better connotations. Sometimes being present means stopping and assessing your life. It means engaging with your life in more holistic manner. It can mean planning, reflection, and listening to yourself.

I feel like many people code switch between being recklessly impulsive and intellectually abstract, while never actually living in the now.

These two avoidant behaviors are at the root most people's miseries.

You shouldn't have to fight yourself to do what is best for your future, or suppress your intellect to enjoy the present.

[yibg]

Is it? If you saw me smoking would you say "you are a smoker" or "you will become a smoker"?