I find this ego-less-ness, suffocation of self-confidence, and philosophy of “nothing matters and we are all leaves in the wind” to be very dysgenic and bland. I think it makes the world quite unmotivating and hard to navigate. It’s good to value yourself and mentally healthy to praise your accomplishments. It is also good to reflect on …
I find this ego-less-ness, suffocation of self-confidence, and philosophy of “nothing matters and we are all leaves in the wind” to be very dysgenic and bland. I think it makes the world quite unmotivating and hard to navigate. It’s good to value yourself and mentally healthy to praise your accomplishments. It is also good to reflect on your shortcomings and where your agency could have taken things in a different / better direction.
Sure, I’m glad you found an equilibrium that works for you. It sounds very comfortable to convince yourself that you have no agency or significance and embrace your brand of nihilism. But I think that’s bad advice to give others.
Agency is frustrating! It comes with the responsibility to do what we think is right. It comes with messy tradeoffs that we can regret. However, it inspires us to do more with our lives than simply seek comfort.
I have an incredible amount of internal dissonance as a result of holding both of these views. Not bad dissonance, necessarily, but it certainly isn't harmony!
I find these comments fascinating, because a few years ago I probably would've thought similar to some of what is being said here, but now I don't anymore. So: I don't think Sasha is denying agency, or against self-reflection, or against doing the right (and maybe difficult) thing. I don't think he is denying personal significance, though that is a more complex topic. And I also don't think he is advocating any form of nihilism. As I understand it, he is just talking about the very experiential insight that we are maybe way less in control than we think or thought we are, or rather, that control and responsibility work in ways way different than we assume(d). And that from that on, taking credit can become a very strange thing. I mean, maybe it is not more than the stunning insight that if you stop taking in negative judgements from yourself and others, you also need to stop taking in the positive ones, because they are in essence the very same thing just turned around. That is, they are both judgements, and sorting things into "good" and "bad". And that it might be very liberating to loosen the grip of this judging-sorting mechanism, because you can suddenly become very present with what is happening here and now and deal with things in a more constructive and unfiltered manner, and -- who are you to say what is good and bad anyways? And it is not that you lose your human spark: You can still make a mistake, have a chuckle, or take in a gentle compliment with a smile.
I love this comment, my journey into being a piss poor buddhist was about the Shenpa (hook, which now I'd associate with dopamine hits) - and how this kind of battle of the blame/praise was so attached to a kind of super excitement in my brain and how long term that was damaging. But also because I had a terrible eating disorder when young that I got rid of by stopping looking at myself in mirrors, and stopping buying (into and literally) women's magazines (thus removing myself from a lot of 'normal' conversation). eventually I grew to wonder what a cat feels like about themselves. our priase/blame is so intense so competitive, but ultimately outwardly focused, whereas gradual lessening of that might just make something more bearable (conflict in script writing etc, getting notes back on lyrics etc etc, someone not loving you). but it doesn't ever stop you wanting things, that battle is a necessary part of life and no sutra ever suggested we'd stop that, more stop being so attached or attached to the wanting or the outcome. (hmmm as I write that I wonder if it's at all true that Nirvana/unboundedness might look like that after all). One thing I noticed in my sangha was the gay men and the females mostly (MOSTLY) were not focussed on 'enlightenment' as a goal, but on 'being less of an asshole'. perhaps because we're already outside the mainstream cultural game, although now brought in 'allowed to play' etc.oh this turned into random thoughts.
I've been stewing on this article since yesterday and trying to formulate a comment. though pointed, Avery's comments concisely capture the core of how i feel about it.
I think this rebuttal from Fabian here is off and missing the point.
(1) the original article makes some pretty explicit points around denying personal significance, denying agency, echoes pillars of nihilism, rejecting self reflection. it may not have been the intention but as written:
"I call it cosmic impostor syndrome. It is what happens when you realize that you really shouldn’t be taking credit for your life, and, as a result, the whole concept of self-esteem stops making sense. "
"and, suddenly, I experienced a soul-level cringe when I realized that I was being lavishly praised for reciting obvious truths, none of which belonged to me. I was just a conduit for trivia I’d encountered by chance. "
"when someone says something nice about my work, it feels like they are complimenting me for the weather. "
what is the point sasha is trying to make with these specific sentences then??
(2) "As I understand it, he is just talking about the very experiential insight that we are maybe way less in control than we think or thought we are, or rather, that control and responsibility work in ways way different than we assume(d). " - I wonder if you're assuming Avery's comments come from a place of not understanding this observation that is made in the article. Yes, I agree that this is an observation that was made in the article. and I agree that, the less you attach your value to criticisms your perceive from others, then you will also start to attach less value to 'compliments' or praise from others. I agree finding peace is detaching from fully basing your value off compliments and shattering in the face of critcism, and spending all your mental energy on that external input.
My problem with the article is the conclusions sasha confidently seems to draw from this observation + the anecdotal experiences he references in the article and his emotional reactions to them.
Sasha's conclusion seems to be, having a mental model where you acknowledge things you have directly contributed to/accomplished are different from everything else that happens in this world (eg the tanginess of the pineapple) is...bad? reflects a misunderstanding of the fundamental nature of the universe? not optimal? and the ideal state of being is to push harder into a mindset where you make no meaningful, emotional discernment between your own actions (on a practical level) and the rest of the universe - and reject the idea there is a meaningful difference between those things to yourself and reject that acknowledgment from others as valid.
I agree that this it is a good idea to not let your self-perception fully depend on compliments/criticism from others and swing wildly based on external input on your actions. Sasha posits that self esteem stops making sense when youre 'elightended', and defines self esteem as something like 'fully basing your self worth as a human on all the input you get from others about yourself'. I dont think self esteem is usually defined that way. I think this definition is wrong and doesnt reflect what many view self esteem as.
My theory is the optimal state of being incorporates balance and flexibility to move between reflection on how my actions impact others/the world and being motivated by that, and the 'we are all pebbles in the fabric of the universe so im not gonna think so had all the time about what im doing' mentality. depending on the situation i am in.
Also something for Sasha to consider - my honest perspective is you self-cringed at the "compliment" because...you were being cringy (acting in a way not aligned with your values, and then the compliment you did not appreciate made you aware of it, and thats why it hurt). Someone else made a much more thoughtful/gentle comment expressing the same sentiment. Consider that how you felt about this random compliment has nothing to do with lack of understanding from those around you who you view as 'not enlightened', of how the universe works. People trying to give you a compliment may understand the same things as you do, but still value giving a genuine compliment anyway, and that is why it is annoying when you reject them.
i think you guys are being extremely literal about this and are positing a kind of nihilism and quietism in a way that does not reflect the way i actually feel and act, which is larger context i would assume comes across from facts like
1) i have two jobs, one of which is a company i just launched
2) i have a passionate relationship and an active social life
3) i have a lot of love for the world and energy to explore and learn
it's just like, i take my self-judgements way less seriously,
positive and negative, assign less weight to praise and blame, and don't feel responsible for creating my life, so much as i feel like i'm one interesting experiment god is doing, part of an emergent intelligence much greater than me — this is entirely compatible with acting in the world and being pretty socially normal, i am mostly the same enthusiastic guy from the outside, i just feel much more chill about it from the inside
"i'm a drop in the ocean" can be a thing you happily say because the ocean is pretty amazing and it's cool to be part of it
Yeah thats fair. In any case, your article made me think a lot and i enjoyed the exercise to try to organize my thoughts into a comment. thanks for reading and replying sasha
i think part of the difficulty here is that this is a primarily experiential point that can be misunderstood if it's translated into a philosophical point. "my life is not mine, i didn't do it, and yet it is precious and i have responsibility" makes little sense in the same register of speech that you'd use to discuss duties in the workplace — it's describing a stance that is hard to grasp without the relevant experience to take a stance on — this is the kind of talk that REALLY pissed me off before i did a bunch of meditation and now i'm like "oh yeah i get it, pretty straightforward"
Perhaps it is possible that someone can understand the philosophical point/stance you describe as hard to grasp, while also taking your post more literally than you meant it to be 😉
My long comment comes from a place of passion in reflecting on this subject but not anger or desire to defend my current perspective so i can feel psychologically safe. But who knows, the mind is complicated, lol. And yes i am projecting all over the place here and making it all about me 😄
Thank you for your thoughtful reply! Maybe I can write a bit more, and hopefully be a bit more precise about what I am trying to say here. And I do find some of the (emotional) reactions here interesting, because they seem to indicate that we are circling around something that deeply matters to people.
So yes, I don't think Sasha's train of thought leads to any form of nihilism, or total relativism, or some of the other things that are being said here. And, as I hinted at before, I also don't think he is trying to fully deconstruct personal responsibility. Maybe that is what people are worried about? I mean, I also take credit for the things I do in my life. But, to maybe give a more practical and personal example: Until July/August this year, I was having quite a rough time, emotionally speaking. And then, suddenly things transformed. Now, I could tell a story about that that goes like this: I (finally) did x, y, and z, and that is why things changed. And that might be true. But also: I really don't know. I mean, why wasn't I doing those things before? Couldn't I? Did I don't want to? Did I need to wait until I was fed up enough to do x, y, and z? But was I not already fed up before? And I find this really interesting, because I vividly remember sitting in a café with my journal, in a state of blankness and frustration, because there seemed something really important that I just couldn't access. But then, a few weeks later, probably also because I tried some new things, things changed -- and something that didn't open before opened. So yes, I did something, but there is also a big part in all of this that will probably always remain a certain mystery.
And we don't even need to start talking about mysticism, the universe, or the ineffable to get there. (Though that might be beautiful, and there are, I find, curious things to discover there.) I mean, even if we are very rational people, we will sooner or later need to acknowledge, I guess, that every rational system has its borders, most patterns sit in their context, and that just very practically speaking there are probably about a gazillion things we don't and can't control. I mean, maybe all of this is also about the limits of what it means to be a human being.
I find all this really important, if not just because it has very practical implications. As I see it, the way many people think about control and non-control is maybe... just not the most helpful? It usually seems to go like this: You have this inner sphere you "control", and as you move away from that, to meet the world and other people, that control gradually loosens. The thing is, when you think like that, you may try to control or manipulate your thoughts, your feelings, your intuitions, and your body. Because you should be in "control", or have "agency". And then, if you are not careful, the fight that Sasha so poignantly described breaks out, and well, that is a very exhausting fight to be in, because you are fighting against something way bigger than you, that is, reality! You could also say that this is about acceptance! For me, something changed when I realized that the psyche has its own inner logic and workings. With all that being said, I would propose that you actually gain agency not by "trying to control", but rather by following the inner and outer threads you are being given. And I would say that there are always some. I mean, maybe agency is not more than being in an open, direct, and constructive dialogue with that what you explicitly don't control. But I do prefer the word "responsibility" over "control", because it is exactly about that: A response.
"Sasha's conclusion seems to be, having a mental model where you acknowledge things you have directly contributed to/accomplished are different from everything else that happens in this world (eg the tanginess of the pineapple) is...bad?" Not bad, maybe just... incomplete? Why limit yourself to one side of the human spectrum, when there is so much more fascinating stuff to discover? But also: Not everything is for everyone, and that is okay. And I also don't think we should "push harder" (your words) into well... probably most things. As Campbell said: "Follow your bliss."
Paradoxically, personal agency works better when it’s not about you. If you look at the things you do as a reflection of yourself / as inputs to your self-esteem, that’s a filter that gets in the way of seeing the world in full color, and so it also gets in the way of acting effectively. I run into this in parenting, where decisions I make because they make me feel like a gold star parent tend to be less in tune with the situation and actually kinda stupid, and I’ve heard that the same thing on a larger scale can be a problem for charity. If people invest in the fantasy of themselves as good and generous and so feel motivated to find evidence for their own goodness, then it makes it harder for them to really see the people they want to help. So they tend to “other” the people they’re helping, and it can make them mad if a recipient of their charity doesn’t correctly perform the role of humble and deserving or has other desires of their own. Oops.
Sasha, similar to your experience of feeling uncomfortable being called wise, but coming from the perspective of pagan practice: I had a trance where I caught a glimpse of myself as a creature who spoke the words of recordings I’d been given—kind of like a human tape deck—and then the same people who gave me the recordings heaped lavish praise on me and gave me lots of stuff because they liked what I was saying so much. It helped me see how weird and circular doing things for praise is, and how the praise I’ve been given isn’t exactly about me or something I want to take credit for. I'll join you in feeling uncomfortable with it.
I find this ego-less-ness, suffocation of self-confidence, and philosophy of “nothing matters and we are all leaves in the wind” to be very dysgenic and bland. I think it makes the world quite unmotivating and hard to navigate. It’s good to value yourself and mentally healthy to praise your accomplishments. It is also good to reflect on your shortcomings and where your agency could have taken things in a different / better direction.
idk man my feeling is that life is a miracle it's just not my miracle, and i feel better than ever
Sure, I’m glad you found an equilibrium that works for you. It sounds very comfortable to convince yourself that you have no agency or significance and embrace your brand of nihilism. But I think that’s bad advice to give others.
Agency is frustrating! It comes with the responsibility to do what we think is right. It comes with messy tradeoffs that we can regret. However, it inspires us to do more with our lives than simply seek comfort.
idk man i feel like you're projecting a lot
I have an incredible amount of internal dissonance as a result of holding both of these views. Not bad dissonance, necessarily, but it certainly isn't harmony!
Me too. My view is that you have a few important levers and windows of opportunity and that’s all you get.
I find these comments fascinating, because a few years ago I probably would've thought similar to some of what is being said here, but now I don't anymore. So: I don't think Sasha is denying agency, or against self-reflection, or against doing the right (and maybe difficult) thing. I don't think he is denying personal significance, though that is a more complex topic. And I also don't think he is advocating any form of nihilism. As I understand it, he is just talking about the very experiential insight that we are maybe way less in control than we think or thought we are, or rather, that control and responsibility work in ways way different than we assume(d). And that from that on, taking credit can become a very strange thing. I mean, maybe it is not more than the stunning insight that if you stop taking in negative judgements from yourself and others, you also need to stop taking in the positive ones, because they are in essence the very same thing just turned around. That is, they are both judgements, and sorting things into "good" and "bad". And that it might be very liberating to loosen the grip of this judging-sorting mechanism, because you can suddenly become very present with what is happening here and now and deal with things in a more constructive and unfiltered manner, and -- who are you to say what is good and bad anyways? And it is not that you lose your human spark: You can still make a mistake, have a chuckle, or take in a gentle compliment with a smile.
Can you write my next post for me
well, now this is a compliment i am going to wear around for a few days :) thank you
I love this comment, my journey into being a piss poor buddhist was about the Shenpa (hook, which now I'd associate with dopamine hits) - and how this kind of battle of the blame/praise was so attached to a kind of super excitement in my brain and how long term that was damaging. But also because I had a terrible eating disorder when young that I got rid of by stopping looking at myself in mirrors, and stopping buying (into and literally) women's magazines (thus removing myself from a lot of 'normal' conversation). eventually I grew to wonder what a cat feels like about themselves. our priase/blame is so intense so competitive, but ultimately outwardly focused, whereas gradual lessening of that might just make something more bearable (conflict in script writing etc, getting notes back on lyrics etc etc, someone not loving you). but it doesn't ever stop you wanting things, that battle is a necessary part of life and no sutra ever suggested we'd stop that, more stop being so attached or attached to the wanting or the outcome. (hmmm as I write that I wonder if it's at all true that Nirvana/unboundedness might look like that after all). One thing I noticed in my sangha was the gay men and the females mostly (MOSTLY) were not focussed on 'enlightenment' as a goal, but on 'being less of an asshole'. perhaps because we're already outside the mainstream cultural game, although now brought in 'allowed to play' etc.oh this turned into random thoughts.
I've been stewing on this article since yesterday and trying to formulate a comment. though pointed, Avery's comments concisely capture the core of how i feel about it.
I think this rebuttal from Fabian here is off and missing the point.
(1) the original article makes some pretty explicit points around denying personal significance, denying agency, echoes pillars of nihilism, rejecting self reflection. it may not have been the intention but as written:
"I call it cosmic impostor syndrome. It is what happens when you realize that you really shouldn’t be taking credit for your life, and, as a result, the whole concept of self-esteem stops making sense. "
"and, suddenly, I experienced a soul-level cringe when I realized that I was being lavishly praised for reciting obvious truths, none of which belonged to me. I was just a conduit for trivia I’d encountered by chance. "
"when someone says something nice about my work, it feels like they are complimenting me for the weather. "
what is the point sasha is trying to make with these specific sentences then??
(2) "As I understand it, he is just talking about the very experiential insight that we are maybe way less in control than we think or thought we are, or rather, that control and responsibility work in ways way different than we assume(d). " - I wonder if you're assuming Avery's comments come from a place of not understanding this observation that is made in the article. Yes, I agree that this is an observation that was made in the article. and I agree that, the less you attach your value to criticisms your perceive from others, then you will also start to attach less value to 'compliments' or praise from others. I agree finding peace is detaching from fully basing your value off compliments and shattering in the face of critcism, and spending all your mental energy on that external input.
My problem with the article is the conclusions sasha confidently seems to draw from this observation + the anecdotal experiences he references in the article and his emotional reactions to them.
Sasha's conclusion seems to be, having a mental model where you acknowledge things you have directly contributed to/accomplished are different from everything else that happens in this world (eg the tanginess of the pineapple) is...bad? reflects a misunderstanding of the fundamental nature of the universe? not optimal? and the ideal state of being is to push harder into a mindset where you make no meaningful, emotional discernment between your own actions (on a practical level) and the rest of the universe - and reject the idea there is a meaningful difference between those things to yourself and reject that acknowledgment from others as valid.
I agree that this it is a good idea to not let your self-perception fully depend on compliments/criticism from others and swing wildly based on external input on your actions. Sasha posits that self esteem stops making sense when youre 'elightended', and defines self esteem as something like 'fully basing your self worth as a human on all the input you get from others about yourself'. I dont think self esteem is usually defined that way. I think this definition is wrong and doesnt reflect what many view self esteem as.
My theory is the optimal state of being incorporates balance and flexibility to move between reflection on how my actions impact others/the world and being motivated by that, and the 'we are all pebbles in the fabric of the universe so im not gonna think so had all the time about what im doing' mentality. depending on the situation i am in.
Also something for Sasha to consider - my honest perspective is you self-cringed at the "compliment" because...you were being cringy (acting in a way not aligned with your values, and then the compliment you did not appreciate made you aware of it, and thats why it hurt). Someone else made a much more thoughtful/gentle comment expressing the same sentiment. Consider that how you felt about this random compliment has nothing to do with lack of understanding from those around you who you view as 'not enlightened', of how the universe works. People trying to give you a compliment may understand the same things as you do, but still value giving a genuine compliment anyway, and that is why it is annoying when you reject them.
i think you guys are being extremely literal about this and are positing a kind of nihilism and quietism in a way that does not reflect the way i actually feel and act, which is larger context i would assume comes across from facts like
1) i have two jobs, one of which is a company i just launched
2) i have a passionate relationship and an active social life
3) i have a lot of love for the world and energy to explore and learn
it's just like, i take my self-judgements way less seriously,
positive and negative, assign less weight to praise and blame, and don't feel responsible for creating my life, so much as i feel like i'm one interesting experiment god is doing, part of an emergent intelligence much greater than me — this is entirely compatible with acting in the world and being pretty socially normal, i am mostly the same enthusiastic guy from the outside, i just feel much more chill about it from the inside
"i'm a drop in the ocean" can be a thing you happily say because the ocean is pretty amazing and it's cool to be part of it
Yeah thats fair. In any case, your article made me think a lot and i enjoyed the exercise to try to organize my thoughts into a comment. thanks for reading and replying sasha
ofc!
i think part of the difficulty here is that this is a primarily experiential point that can be misunderstood if it's translated into a philosophical point. "my life is not mine, i didn't do it, and yet it is precious and i have responsibility" makes little sense in the same register of speech that you'd use to discuss duties in the workplace — it's describing a stance that is hard to grasp without the relevant experience to take a stance on — this is the kind of talk that REALLY pissed me off before i did a bunch of meditation and now i'm like "oh yeah i get it, pretty straightforward"
Perhaps it is possible that someone can understand the philosophical point/stance you describe as hard to grasp, while also taking your post more literally than you meant it to be 😉
My long comment comes from a place of passion in reflecting on this subject but not anger or desire to defend my current perspective so i can feel psychologically safe. But who knows, the mind is complicated, lol. And yes i am projecting all over the place here and making it all about me 😄
Thank you for your thoughtful reply! Maybe I can write a bit more, and hopefully be a bit more precise about what I am trying to say here. And I do find some of the (emotional) reactions here interesting, because they seem to indicate that we are circling around something that deeply matters to people.
So yes, I don't think Sasha's train of thought leads to any form of nihilism, or total relativism, or some of the other things that are being said here. And, as I hinted at before, I also don't think he is trying to fully deconstruct personal responsibility. Maybe that is what people are worried about? I mean, I also take credit for the things I do in my life. But, to maybe give a more practical and personal example: Until July/August this year, I was having quite a rough time, emotionally speaking. And then, suddenly things transformed. Now, I could tell a story about that that goes like this: I (finally) did x, y, and z, and that is why things changed. And that might be true. But also: I really don't know. I mean, why wasn't I doing those things before? Couldn't I? Did I don't want to? Did I need to wait until I was fed up enough to do x, y, and z? But was I not already fed up before? And I find this really interesting, because I vividly remember sitting in a café with my journal, in a state of blankness and frustration, because there seemed something really important that I just couldn't access. But then, a few weeks later, probably also because I tried some new things, things changed -- and something that didn't open before opened. So yes, I did something, but there is also a big part in all of this that will probably always remain a certain mystery.
And we don't even need to start talking about mysticism, the universe, or the ineffable to get there. (Though that might be beautiful, and there are, I find, curious things to discover there.) I mean, even if we are very rational people, we will sooner or later need to acknowledge, I guess, that every rational system has its borders, most patterns sit in their context, and that just very practically speaking there are probably about a gazillion things we don't and can't control. I mean, maybe all of this is also about the limits of what it means to be a human being.
I find all this really important, if not just because it has very practical implications. As I see it, the way many people think about control and non-control is maybe... just not the most helpful? It usually seems to go like this: You have this inner sphere you "control", and as you move away from that, to meet the world and other people, that control gradually loosens. The thing is, when you think like that, you may try to control or manipulate your thoughts, your feelings, your intuitions, and your body. Because you should be in "control", or have "agency". And then, if you are not careful, the fight that Sasha so poignantly described breaks out, and well, that is a very exhausting fight to be in, because you are fighting against something way bigger than you, that is, reality! You could also say that this is about acceptance! For me, something changed when I realized that the psyche has its own inner logic and workings. With all that being said, I would propose that you actually gain agency not by "trying to control", but rather by following the inner and outer threads you are being given. And I would say that there are always some. I mean, maybe agency is not more than being in an open, direct, and constructive dialogue with that what you explicitly don't control. But I do prefer the word "responsibility" over "control", because it is exactly about that: A response.
"Sasha's conclusion seems to be, having a mental model where you acknowledge things you have directly contributed to/accomplished are different from everything else that happens in this world (eg the tanginess of the pineapple) is...bad?" Not bad, maybe just... incomplete? Why limit yourself to one side of the human spectrum, when there is so much more fascinating stuff to discover? But also: Not everything is for everyone, and that is okay. And I also don't think we should "push harder" (your words) into well... probably most things. As Campbell said: "Follow your bliss."
Ahhh i love your reply Fabian. I totally agree with everything you wrote. Thanks for writing all of that
With my comment im coming from the same perspective as you laid out here. It is interesting
Paradoxically, personal agency works better when it’s not about you. If you look at the things you do as a reflection of yourself / as inputs to your self-esteem, that’s a filter that gets in the way of seeing the world in full color, and so it also gets in the way of acting effectively. I run into this in parenting, where decisions I make because they make me feel like a gold star parent tend to be less in tune with the situation and actually kinda stupid, and I’ve heard that the same thing on a larger scale can be a problem for charity. If people invest in the fantasy of themselves as good and generous and so feel motivated to find evidence for their own goodness, then it makes it harder for them to really see the people they want to help. So they tend to “other” the people they’re helping, and it can make them mad if a recipient of their charity doesn’t correctly perform the role of humble and deserving or has other desires of their own. Oops.
Sasha, similar to your experience of feeling uncomfortable being called wise, but coming from the perspective of pagan practice: I had a trance where I caught a glimpse of myself as a creature who spoke the words of recordings I’d been given—kind of like a human tape deck—and then the same people who gave me the recordings heaped lavish praise on me and gave me lots of stuff because they liked what I was saying so much. It helped me see how weird and circular doing things for praise is, and how the praise I’ve been given isn’t exactly about me or something I want to take credit for. I'll join you in feeling uncomfortable with it.