User Power
Value/Post Ratio
267%
- Oct 27, 2013
- 599
- 1,597
If you're fortunate enough to still be able to talk to your parents, without a doubt they'll be able to tell you a story about what a picky eater you were in your infancy and a few years beyond. In my old country, it's popular to feed toddlers different kinds of liquefied porridge regularly. According to my mother, I was very picky. I could smell Banana porridge from a mile away, and would not touch it, if I was force-fed, I'd wait patiently until they let their guard down, then spit it out. When I DID eat other porridge, I'd only have 200ml. (Yes, I knew what 200ml was, somehow ) and not a ml more or less.
Then I got older and started eating harder foods. I'd put down the knife and fork or any utensils, and I'd pick away, with my fingers. 'I like bits of chicken, I like that red stuff, I like that green stuff, eww, I hate that.' I'd eat the stuff I like while ignoring the stuff I don't. Somewhere along the line, we lose this ability to trust our judgement on a grander scale.
How is this relevant to anything on the forum?
Recently there has been an influx of very profound and thought-provoking threads (stuff people make money writing books about) Mostly opinion based, meaning that you can choose to agree with the method, disagree with the method, disagree with the presentation of the method, whatever.
In these threads a common theme was that some people would disagree with a minor part of the message, and end up missing out on a LOT of useful information that would probably help them. It's sort of a knee-jerk ego-defense mechanism a la 'because if you're right, and I disagree with you, then that must mean I'm wrong, right? Cuz that shit ain't gonna fly, son'.
Society conditions us into a very clear cut, black and white, no-compromise way of digesting information. As if subjective disagreements couldn't co-exist with each other. We learn in school that 2+2=4, the world is made up of atoms, and your intelligence is determined by the number of facts you are able to recall in a way that pleases the examiner, or your boss. Indisputable facts. But not everything is an indisputable fact.
Then we have stupid platitudes like 'if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.' 'There I must stand for something because it's the right thing to do/my dad stood for it/real men eat steak and women cook'. These behaviors (and others I haven't bothered to mention) result us burning forests to kill a tree. And thus missing out on a lot of wood.
When you were a baby, you did not look at everything on a plate as 'food'. So you didn't think 'I don't like food' *smashes plate*. You thought 'chicken, bean sprouts, lettuce, that red thing that looks like lettuce but has its own name' and you picked out what you like, and what you don't like.
The difference is, when you were a baby, you didn't care about nutrition and getting a balanced diet, you were 'ignorant' so to speak. However, now, (most of) you have good judgement, and can discern what is good for you and what isn't. What is right for you and what isn't.
And what you cannot discern, you can learn! (By your own experience, or that of others) We are taught not to trust ourselves - this includes trusting ourselves to 'fail' and deal with it. So we look for magic pills. Not only because of laziness, but the inherent fear of experimentation and learning (or 'failure' if you're a masochist) Because 'no way am I good enough to be able to just stick to my guns, am I?'
So IF your goal is to optimize your proverbial 'lemonade making output'. Eat information the way a baby eats a chicken salad. If something irks you the wrong way, say 'eww gross'/analyze why it's making you feel that way/get mad for 3 seconds if you want and move on.
Don't toss the plate because you saw some beansprouts, put them to the side and look for stuff that you like/may help you. You will save yourself stress, and gain yourself insight. This doesn't always apply, if there's something you fundamentally disagree with, you can just choose to ignore it (and I do this.) But there is more lemonade to be had if you stop throwing away lemons because you found a lemon seed.
It's okay to trust yourself. It's okay to trust yourself to be able to deal with a 'failure' that may arise.
Then I got older and started eating harder foods. I'd put down the knife and fork or any utensils, and I'd pick away, with my fingers. 'I like bits of chicken, I like that red stuff, I like that green stuff, eww, I hate that.' I'd eat the stuff I like while ignoring the stuff I don't. Somewhere along the line, we lose this ability to trust our judgement on a grander scale.
How is this relevant to anything on the forum?
Recently there has been an influx of very profound and thought-provoking threads (stuff people make money writing books about) Mostly opinion based, meaning that you can choose to agree with the method, disagree with the method, disagree with the presentation of the method, whatever.
In these threads a common theme was that some people would disagree with a minor part of the message, and end up missing out on a LOT of useful information that would probably help them. It's sort of a knee-jerk ego-defense mechanism a la 'because if you're right, and I disagree with you, then that must mean I'm wrong, right? Cuz that shit ain't gonna fly, son'.
Society conditions us into a very clear cut, black and white, no-compromise way of digesting information. As if subjective disagreements couldn't co-exist with each other. We learn in school that 2+2=4, the world is made up of atoms, and your intelligence is determined by the number of facts you are able to recall in a way that pleases the examiner, or your boss. Indisputable facts. But not everything is an indisputable fact.
Then we have stupid platitudes like 'if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.' 'There I must stand for something because it's the right thing to do/my dad stood for it/real men eat steak and women cook'. These behaviors (and others I haven't bothered to mention) result us burning forests to kill a tree. And thus missing out on a lot of wood.
When you were a baby, you did not look at everything on a plate as 'food'. So you didn't think 'I don't like food' *smashes plate*. You thought 'chicken, bean sprouts, lettuce, that red thing that looks like lettuce but has its own name' and you picked out what you like, and what you don't like.
The difference is, when you were a baby, you didn't care about nutrition and getting a balanced diet, you were 'ignorant' so to speak. However, now, (most of) you have good judgement, and can discern what is good for you and what isn't. What is right for you and what isn't.
And what you cannot discern, you can learn! (By your own experience, or that of others) We are taught not to trust ourselves - this includes trusting ourselves to 'fail' and deal with it. So we look for magic pills. Not only because of laziness, but the inherent fear of experimentation and learning (or 'failure' if you're a masochist) Because 'no way am I good enough to be able to just stick to my guns, am I?'
So IF your goal is to optimize your proverbial 'lemonade making output'. Eat information the way a baby eats a chicken salad. If something irks you the wrong way, say 'eww gross'/analyze why it's making you feel that way/get mad for 3 seconds if you want and move on.
Don't toss the plate because you saw some beansprouts, put them to the side and look for stuff that you like/may help you. You will save yourself stress, and gain yourself insight. This doesn't always apply, if there's something you fundamentally disagree with, you can just choose to ignore it (and I do this.) But there is more lemonade to be had if you stop throwing away lemons because you found a lemon seed.
It's okay to trust yourself. It's okay to trust yourself to be able to deal with a 'failure' that may arise.
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum:
Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.