[lotharbot]

2/ Only surround yourself with brilliant and positive people.

I partly agree with this rule. People who are negative drama-creators who regularly make bad decisions can really drag you down. They can cause you to spend an excessive amount of time worrying about pointless problems that only exist because of someone else's immaturity.

But I'm also a teacher. I work with at-risk children who are immature and sometimes make bad decisions -- exactly the kind of people this rule says to stay away from, only they're 9 years old instead of 35. And being around them makes me very happy -- because of the difference I can make for them. I find it unfortunate that people sometimes fear "negativity" and "immaturity" so much that they let themselves be scared away from rewarding opportunities.

[x0054]

I think the author is talking about people you choose to have in your life, people you would consider taking advice from and talking about your problems with. The 9 year olds in your profession probably provide very rewarding relationship, and they are people you can help. But they are hardly your "friends."

If you were to surround your self with a bunch of 30 something neurotics who all needed your help, and it was not part of your job to help these people, then you would be in trouble.

[001sky]

In a pure meritocracy, the best academic students are admitted, since college has an academic purpose. Most of these academically-oriented students are going to be the driven-to-succeed type. It benefits a school not at all to have an unhappy bottom quarter who feel driven to succeed yet are outclassed academically by the rest of the cohort. However, it's impossible to help the bottom quarter in general because there always must be a bottom quarter by definition.

Instead, pioneered by Harvard, the "Happy Bottom Quarter" philosophy argues that for the sake of fundraising, reputation, and the self-esteem of students, schools should admit people specifically for the bottom quarter[1]

_______

[1] http://www.quora.com/College-and-University-Admissions/What-...

[apologies on the source, but it's footnotes are researched and worth the correct attribution].

[bradleysmith]

I don't like this, as a rule. The author warns of its shortcomings pretty well:

>Of course, if you care about them, then you owe it to yourself to transmit your positive attitude to them.

I've found that who you surround yourself with is quite often outside of your control. Sooner or later, you're bound to care about someone with negative qualities that you don't want to see in yourself. I do not believe that is justification for cutting them out of your life!

Value brilliance and positivity in people, and avoid participating in negativity is a better rule, for me.

made me think of George Washington's rules of civility[1] (# 56): Associate yourself with Men of good Quality if you Esteem your own Reputation; for 'tis better to be alone than in bad Company

[1]-http://www.history.org/almanack/life/manners/rules2.cfm

[timr]

I was hoping that you were going to critique the need to surround yourself with "positive people".

There's obviously a lot to be said for not surrounding yourself with pessimists, but (in the US, anyway, and silicon valley, in particular), the default personality type tends to be "optimism to the point of delusion". It's just as problematic to overdose on positive thinking as it is being surrounded by pessimists.

Optimism is like sugar: it's great and you need it, but if you eat too much of it you'll only get sick. And just like sugar, the average US diet already has plenty.

[quaunaut]

I could not disagree more readily.

Note: I don't live in silicon valley.

We're talking about a nation of people who, by far, believe they are stuck with the life they were given, with no means of control. Sure, they hope that one day they'll be able to achieve their dreams and desires, but by far, the majority of the country(outside of Silicon Valley) has the opinion that the only way to live, is to slave it out for someone else doing something you don't like. Hell, you hear half as much in comedy routines, frequently(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ph9I-qPQ6FU, and I've heard several others make the same comment, including Chris Rock, Louis CK, and Ricky Gervais).

But the attitude silicon valley seems to foster in people- that if you work hard at something you believe in, you have a chance at being successful in ways you never could have dreamed? That's the only way an economy is going to work in the future. That's the only way when the majority of manual labor jobs can be eliminated by automation. Being able to teach, develop, and put yourself to good use in something you're proud of is gonna be the only way we've got left.

Pessimism isn't worth shit, and we've got too much of it in the US. At least with optimism, people try things. Sure, their dreams of success might be delusional- but they still have value, in that they'll try, and in trying, better themselves. The other option is that they just keep living a life of misery or mediocrity, and that way leads only madness.

[timr]

If you don't live here, then you have no idea what I'm talking about.

Look, there are obviously pockets of this country where people feel stuck. I'm even a firm believer that many people in the US actually are stuck in place by forces beyond their control. But in general, a lack of optimism has never been a problem in this country.

Survey after survey tells us that, on average, Americans believe that we're smarter, more capable and harder working than our peers. We believe that if we work hard, we'll be rewarded proportionately. We believe that the rich/poor gap is much smaller than it is. We believe -- in ridiculously large numbers -- that we all have a realistic chance of becoming wealthy. It manifests itself in thousands of ridiculous ways, from our abysmal savings rate, to the way our political system tends to reward the wealthy at the expense of the average.

There's a human bias toward optimism, but Americans really take it to the next level:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/15/opinion/15Sharot.html?_r=0

[smtddr]

There's a difference between optimism, arrogance, desperation and ignorance. Some of the things you described I wouldn't label with the word "optimism".

[Jormundir]

The rule would be better if it was:

Realize the effect you have on the people around you. If you're are negative, you will make the people around you feel negatively, if you are positive, you will make them positive.

It's more powerful than advice telling you to cut people out of your lives. You will have a better effect on the world.

To me, blaming the people around you for your own negative feelings is part of the 'blame others for your own problems' negative cycle of excuses. Make the people around you positive by being positive, by being a good friend: listening, inspiring, generally caring.

[InclinedPlane]

I too think this guideline is far too simplistic.

In a sense it almost puts relationships in a transactional context. And people who do that are often assholes.

I think it's important to seek out people with whom you value spending time with, as well as to distance yourself from people who are not good friends and aren't deserving of your time or energy, but that's a much more complicated topic than can be summed up in a handful of words.

[Amokrane]

I do agree with you guys. In the article I make the distinction between people you care about or love (read: family, close friends, your students, people you decided to help) and the others. Specifically, what I find to be dangerous is when you are not aware of the bad influence someone else has on you, and when you are only surrounded by these type of persons who believe that nothing is worth doing/living, then you might end up thinking the same way. It's funny that some comments are about people in the Silicon-Valley being too optimistic or even delusional, because I live in France and I commute frequently to the Bay Area. I find that when I leave to San Francisco, I always feel very morose and when I come back I am always in a fired up mood! But slowly, this mood disappears because the average french is pessimistic about almost everything.