The decay of the soul past 30

[dr froyd]

man, when i look around and see my friends (mostly early 30s), they're all slowly withering away. They all had dreams, even just 6-7 years ago. Now they're settling in for a slow death – with a wife, a mortgage, and a 9-5 job.

im just wondering, is it just a natural progression in life, or is it the burden of life that drains all their energy, or maybe it's the result of getting married?

or perhaps dreams are foolish to begin with.

maybe it's just the fatal outcome of falling into routines. When i visit my childhood home, at the nearby store i can see the *same* people working there that worked there 20 years ago. They were in their early 20s back then - and probably thought it was just a temporary job.

either way my verdict is that none of them are happy

 

[ZenRaiden]

I see it with my body. I go to yoga and I am tired.
When I was 15 I went to tae kwon do practice on a bike for 15 minutes full speed, then had 2 hours of none stop jumping and went for 15 minutes home. And still had energy to play games all night until morning till going to school.

I think past 30 the body is in kind of homeostasis and decline.
We move less, we remember less and we try less.
Then you do get less energy.

I don't think though it has to do with age. I think it has to do with how we treat our bodies, and our lifestyle.

Its easier to be 30 and do lot less and get by.

I plan to do a reverse uno thing. I plan to get better as my age progresses.

My ideal is to be 40 financially secure and just have good time and no debt or necessity for job. I want to have few skills to get by on job market, but mostly I want to spend my life on Earth having fun.

I would consider the civilization hamster wheel good deal if there was something in it for me. But there is not.

Having kids will only come in picture when I can deal with my psychological shit.
Right now I am barely able to keep track of time.

Playfulness is antidote to old age.

My parents are age 64 and their life sucks.
Financially they have everything, but the sum total of their life is 3 things.
Going to work to pay off debt.
Gardening and chores.
Waiting for grand kids.
That to me seems like a life that has nothing left in it for themselves.
With age we forget we are still people who need to have fun and enjoy life.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Well, I mean if we were to be a devil advocate about the whole thing, maybe 'life' wasn't that great to begin with. What the young view as exciting or great is only because the senior generations are trying to sell them something, whether that be via entertainment or leisure. They inadvertently built our culture in a way to exploit our spending habits.

I think if we strip away all the trappings of consumer culture, what truly brings joy is the bringing of new life. That's a constant and something that isn't contingent on economic inclinations throughout the millenia. There's something joyful in raising a kid that is part you, in a loving, fun enviornment. As some mother's claim, "my children's journey is my journey". The relationship is the joy, not necessarily scientific or societal advancement.

 

[birdsnestfern]

Right now, life everywhere is pretty bad.
Not necessarily age related, I think the economy, over crowding and lack of space is difficult all over.
But, you can value not being tied down or obligated to anyone.
The pandemic made most people feel psychologically depressed a bit.

Here is one thing to try:
Imagine a hula hoop at your feet, you in the middle. Reach down and pick up the hoop and raise it above your head.
Actually physically bend down and lift the imaginary hoop above your head. Repeat this three times. There is a force field around you, and you can lift it up above your head. It lifts your energy up.

Last year I was feeling that and took a class called "Your Glorious Life" which helped pull me out of the isolated dullness.

Travel, dream of writing books, take an art class, learn to fish, look up destinations and places that you want to visit, just get out and do things now. Remember to appreciate little things, like breathing.
Anyway, I had to take this, it was very much an intuitive type thing, you've got to try to create new things, thats part of the secret of joy:

Learn With Sonia - Sonia Choquette

soniachoquette.net

 

[Hourglass]

They all had dreams, even just 6-7 years ago.

I felt as if you were describing me as I read how you were describing your friends.

While I don’t feel necessarily soulless, I don’t feel particularly soulful either.

A few years ago I thought I was meant for something bigger than myself - Not in a self-inflated way but in a way such that when I’m much older I could look back on the years prior and think to myself, “hey, I did it, I made this thing and it helped the world.” I sense that is a natural thing that some people hope to feel: purpose.

Then I realized helping the world is hard because people are different from one another and terribly hard to “help” in a meaningful way: Sometimes people who ask for help or even demand help a ton sometimes don’t need it, and sometimes those who need help the most never ask for it or rarely ask. So helpfulness and what it should be isn’t prevalent in society and instead reduced to things like
random prompts online or at kiosks asking “was this helpful?” and getting a meaningless response.

Somehow I started to think about things like the possibility of one day starting a family and providing for a family, for children. That made me think more seriously about how I can be less frivolous and more “serious” with everything, in case that possibility becomes real. But it also made me realize that having children is not inexpensive and so I need to best optimize my life in such a way that they don’t struggle with what I went through - I imagine most parents hope for that for their children - less struggle and more happiness in their children’s lives. And that creates residual happiness.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I think if we strip away all the trappings of consumer culture, what truly brings joy is the bringing of new life. That's a constant and something that isn't contingent on economic inclinations throughout the millenia. There's something joyful in raising a kid that is part you, in a loving, fun enviornment. As some mother's claim, "my children's journey is my journey". The relationship is the joy, not necessarily scientific or societal advancement.

I can see the reasoning, but I could just as well write the same thing, without inserting children into the equation.
Joy like all aspects of life in human life is multi facet factor. I would consider kids as part of it, but not all of it.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Then I realized helping the world is hard because people are different from one another and terribly hard to “help” in a meaningful way: Sometimes people who ask for help or even demand help a ton sometimes don’t need it, and sometimes those who need help the most never ask for it or rarely ask. So helpfulness and what it should be isn’t prevalent in society and instead reduced to things like
random prompts online or at kiosks asking “was this helpful?” and getting a meaningless response.

Somehow I started to think about things like the possibility of one day starting a family and providing for a family, for children. That made me think more seriously about how I can be less frivolous and more “serious” with everything, in case that possibility becomes real. But it also made me realize that having children is not inexpensive and so I need to best optimize my life in such a way that they don’t struggle with what I went through - I imagine most parents hope for that for their children - less struggle and more happiness in their children’s lives. And that creates residual happiness.

Happiness comes from connection.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Right now, life everywhere is pretty bad.

Life is what we make it. I found that a lot of times modern world is way more disconnected from nature and natural connection that people in more poor world have.
For instance I find it hilarious that some people live a better life from health and happiness point of view than people in modern world.
I mean people pay for vacations to go and have free time, when people in poor countries often times have more free time on their hands then they can handle.
We are over-stressed from nothing.
Most people go to jobs they don't even care about.
Have a boss that will boot them the second its convenient.
Make money to pay for things people cannot even afford.
Then go on vacations people can afford so they can de stress.

All in all I am better of buying a hut in the jungle or better yet just building it, and swimming in the sea and catching fish just for food.
Not going to do that as that requires me to abandon modern life, but honestly if shit goes down, its plan B.

 

[Hourglass]

Then I realized helping the world is hard because people are different from one another and terribly hard to “help” in a meaningful way: Sometimes people who ask for help or even demand help a ton sometimes don’t need it, and sometimes those who need help the most never ask for it or rarely ask. So helpfulness and what it should be isn’t prevalent in society and instead reduced to things like
random prompts online or at kiosks asking “was this helpful?” and getting a meaningless response.

Somehow I started to think about things like the possibility of one day starting a family and providing for a family, for children. That made me think more seriously about how I can be less frivolous and more “serious” with everything, in case that possibility becomes real. But it also made me realize that having children is not inexpensive and so I need to best optimize my life in such a way that they don’t struggle with what I went through - I imagine most parents hope for that for their children - less struggle and more happiness in their children’s lives. And that creates residual happiness.

Happiness comes from connection.

Well said, though I suppose the quality of the connection matters as well as a “poor connection” does not instantiate a bond that turns a bond into a relationship - and relationships are either shallow, deep, or somewhere amongst the middle.

We have too many shallow connections in today’s world.

We seek “deep” connection but become tired of it and move onto something else.

We seek “novelty” in connection and then revert to seeking something deep.

Such a vast variability.

Do we dare attempt to comprehend it?

 

[ZenRaiden]

quality of the connection matters

There is only one type of connection that makes people happy, and that is a connection where you don't have to change who you are for other people.
A perfect connection is if you can pick your nose and fart in front of the person and have yellow teeth and they still see you as a you are.
To put simply you can be yourself.
Unfortunately in todays society and especially for women this seems unattainable.

 

[Hourglass]

Then go on vacations people can afford so they can de stress.

We love buying distractions. Vacations are one form of distraction that we as a society seem to have have told ourselves are worthwhile if we haven’t been to a certain place before.

On the one hand, exploring different cultures is generally accepted as a good thing to do.

On the other hand, logistics of going from one destination to another isn’t as scalable as they should be, until maybe hyperloop.

But even hyperloop is not commercially available (to my knowledge) and even if it was, it would be susceptible to accidents and surrounding legal challenges of large magnitude.

Also, what is the fascination behind traveling to more locations? Different people? Environmental stimuli? Feeling anything different? Escapism? Family and friend geological distribution?

The world’s greatest attractions appear to distract us from the reality of being human.

 

[Hourglass]

abandon modern life

This is a brilliant concept.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Vacations are one form of distraction

It depends. Psychologically change of environment can recharge people.
Provided you enjoy the environment.

On the one hand, exploring different cultures is generally accepted as a good thing to do.

It depends. Buying a postcard is not much culture. Or seeing a ruin in Greece, or going on some lame safari where you see a lion fart and roar up close.
I have been to the US, but upon landing, and counting a total of 2 years in US I learned a lot more about US culture. Living in culture (immersive) and visiting a culture very different world.

It made me realize one thing. That the idea of visiting a country for few weeks makes zero impact on understanding culture.
People who know how to say thank you, please, and hello in Italian and watch a pizza guy Mario make pizza are not immersed much.
Maybe students who study abroad make more of it.

I mean I still don't even get my countries culture. I guess superficial understandings are all people really seek.

On the other hand, logistics of going from one destination to another isn’t as scalable as they should be, until maybe hyperloop.

Sitting by a local lake it made me realize that although the water is not salty and there are no waves, the sun and water make for one hell of a vacation. Its only 5 minutes walk. It made me realize that I would have to pay some 800 euros to have the same experience. What ho bitches. I am on vacation for free. The water stinks a little and there are mosquitos, but essentially the experience is literally same. Only cheaper.

Also, what is the fascination behind traveling to more locations?

I never understood this.

Different people?

I guess maybe, but people who want to travel far, usually are not people people.

Environmental stimuli?

Generally I think the idea of different environment is more powerful than the actual difference of environment.

Feeling anything different?

I know my mother feels different if she spends lots of money on something. I have yet to understand how that works.

Escapism?

I don't blame people for this. Most of modern life is hell.

The world’s greatest attractions appear to distract us from the reality of being human.

Tourism though is trillion dollar business. Just Paris gets a million visitors yearly. Making people feel great is the idea. I remember being to Paris. Its boring honestly.
The Eiffel tower is cool, but the line for is not worth the 1 minute of being crowded at the top.

Personally I like seeing other countries consumer goods. Kind of gives you idea where from I can get better shit.
I also like sampling foods. But if I get to eat them once a life time I sometimes fail to see the point.

 

[Hourglass]

There is only one type of connection that makes people happy, and that is a connection where you don't have to change who you are for other people.

Is this equivalent to “acceptance”? Maybe it is something more than just acceptance.

Acknowledgement? Appreciation?

Friendship? Companionship?

Mutual co-existence? Synchronicity?

 

[Hourglass]

Life is what we make it.

That’s what we like to believe and condition ourselves to believe. Existentialism.

It sometimes works as a mental mantra, until something occurs unexpectedly for reasons within or beyond our control.

If we emphasize the “we” part it would
then mean that “life is what an individual and the people around the individual make life to be.”

 

[onesteptwostep]

I think if we strip away all the trappings of consumer culture, what truly brings joy is the bringing of new life. That's a constant and something that isn't contingent on economic inclinations throughout the millenia. There's something joyful in raising a kid that is part you, in a loving, fun enviornment. As some mother's claim, "my children's journey is my journey". The relationship is the joy, not necessarily scientific or societal advancement.

I can see the reasoning, but I could just as well write the same thing, without inserting children into the equation.
Joy like all aspects of life in human life is multi facet factor. I would consider kids as part of it, but not all of it.

I just plainly disagree. Joy in life is contingent on society's perception of what joy is. If we were the first humans, or at least the first human that crossed over the threshhold of humanhood, whatever joy here is purely of creating a bonding with your child. Humans have sacrificed much throughout the millenia to allow their child to live on, going as far as to give up their lives so that the child may live. Society depends on persons for its ontological existence. "People" here means having kids who will become member of that ontological state. This means our perception of joy that results from aspects of joy outside of childrearing is influenced by childrearing itself. This doesn't place singleness or parenthood at a lower level, but from a naturalistic point of view they are not on the same ontological level of value to humanity.

There is also the argument from economics. Generations always create business that cater and make use of the generation under them. The joy of the older generation derives from the younger's economic engagement. And as such, our joys, whether or not they involve childrearing, will depend on the economic activites of the generation that comes after us. Joy is dependent on childern, whether you partake in it or not.

There's a very profound poem by John Donne:

No man is an island entire of itself; every man
is a piece of the continent, a part of the main;
if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe
is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as
well as any manner of thy friends or of thine
own were; any man's death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind.
And therefore never send to know for whom
the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

No man is an island.

 

[Hourglass]

sun and water

This is literally and figuratively life.

You found the secret to life.

 

[Hourglass]

Ok, so this is the ultimate truth behind why some people in their early thirties when observed these days appear to be soulless or express soullessness:

They didn’t get enough sun and water.

@ZenRaiden Mentioned it first.

 

[ZenRaiden]

No man is an island.

True. And I did not say children are not joy. I said they are not the only source.
In fact most children stuff is pretty hard and joyless task. Once the kid hits 15 try making it listen to your advice. Hard to do.
Surely its good and joy. But you are reducing joy to single variable seems to me.
So kids have kids have kids have kids. Where is the actual joy there?
And you also imply that people enjoy having kids by default.
Not everyone does.

 

[ZenRaiden]

This is literally and figuratively life.

You found the secret to life.

For me that is true. I spent my vacation time mostly in water. I barely enjoyed anything else. I am not joking I want to be born a sea otter next life.

 

[onesteptwostep]

No man is an island.

True. And I did not say children are not joy. I said they are not the only source.
In fact most children stuff is pretty hard and joyless task. Once the kid hits 15 try making it listen to your advice. Hard to do.
Surely its good and joy. But you are reducing joy to single variable seems to me.
So kids have kids have kids have kids. Where is the actual joy there?
And you also imply that people enjoy having kids by default.
Not everyone does.

Right. But I think it's important to set our priorities straight, because if we rightly claim that our kids are of paramount importance, we then have to look into things that make their living enviornment better. If we focus on that, we will focus on whether the economy is working, or whether our politics is working. If you want progress you need an anchor, a source of direction where you can have all your actions flow from. We want freedom, but in what capacity and what sense? We want goodness, but by what means and for what purpose?

If we do not have a primary anchor, it's very easy to get lost and adhere to nothingness, like Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, and the later existentialists, from Sarte and Camus and Foucalt, had done. Note, philosophers who led pessmistic views did not raise a good family or keep their household in order. Society did not grow better because of their rantings. If they truly affirmed life, they would have made families and passed that ideal onto their children.

At least Schopenhauer had a son, the rest dabbled in self sophistication and brought chaos into the politcs of their soceities.

In short, you need an anchor. Human history did not begin from the self, it began and was sustained because of the love of their offspring.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Since my words probably won't be persuasive, I'll share a video that really was profoundly impactful to me.

Woops wrong video, I meant this one:

 

[Hourglass]

This doesn't place singleness or parenthood at a lower level, but from a naturalistic point of view they are not on the same ontological level of value to humanity.

This is an interesting point that makes me view the possibility of pursuing both parenthood and a career (or another supposedly individualistic or dutiful path of living) as more mutually beneficial than not.

There is an element of cognitive readiness as well to pursuing either or both parenthood or something that furthers intellectual or societal advancement.

Perhaps certain children can bring joy to their parents, but that feeling can be fleeting, and perhaps it is moreso a fulfillment of purpose and expanding one’s legacy and continuity of familial identity that childrearing brings. That is, perhaps, moreso if the childrearing was planned or expected.

Children all tend to develop and behave differently as well… Which can affect a parent’s happiness or joy, but if the decision is/was an intrinsically motivated decision to have a child then the joy of having a child or children likely makes it all the more meaningful and fulfilling.

 

[onesteptwostep]

This doesn't place singleness or parenthood at a lower level, but from a naturalistic point of view they are not on the same ontological level of value to humanity.

This is an interesting point that makes me view the possibility of pursuing both parenthood and a career (or another supposedly individualistic or dutiful path of living) as more mutually beneficial than not.

There is an element of cognitive readiness as well to pursuing either or both parenthood or something that furthers intellectual or societal advancement.

Perhaps certain children can bring joy to their parents, but that feeling can be fleeting, and perhaps it is moreso a fulfillment of purpose and expanding one’s legacy and continuity of familial identity that childrearing brings. That is, perhaps, moreso if the childrearing was planned or expected.

Children all tend to develop and behave differently as well… Which can affect a parent’s happiness or joy, but if the decision is/was an intrinsically motivated decision to have a child then the joy of having a child or children likely makes it all the more meaningful and fulfilling.

Right. I think certain feminists have decried motherhood for way too long. There's not much intellectual backing for motherhood, but if you really think about it, mothers are the backbone of society. They are the biggest economic spenders, choosing what to consume for the families, and younger couples drive the need for appliances and furniture goods. Cars for example are built for families, and the decision for purchase largely depends on the needs of that family, for the kids. The mere value a child brings in, because it is valuable for the parents, is from an economic viewpoint a plus for society.

However the issues arise when we affect parenthood or get in the way of a healthy family experience. In short, all societal issues primarily arise from problems within the family.

Besides the reinvisioning of parenthood though, I always thought that mothers have it easier then men, because they're literally built with an teleological function within their bodies. In other words, they pretty much have a sense of purpose via their sex. Men don't have that built in purpose, we have to create it for our own, whether that being creating a family, achieving honor in business or other social virtues, whether that be intellectual or via reputation. It's a bit removed from the point, but when you lay it out, it's like.. women in a philosophical, existientialist sense, have it easier. Feminists might decry this as a limitation on their freedom and choices, but when you have no choices as a male, it can be extremely debilitating. It turns you into a ghost, powerless and without true agency.

 

[Hourglass]

love of their offspring

The feeling of being within a family is a basic human need. For some people family and happiness are synonymous.

The feeling of creating a family or creating ideological offspring - is this a basic human need, moreso than actually reproducing?

I ask because some individuals don’t have families and seek belonging in other ways.

Some individuals cannot reproduce and cannot find meaning from reproduction.

Women after a certain age or due to health complications are unable to conceive at all. Some women are at risk of not surviving childbirth and thankfully have the right not to conceive.

And so in these cases things purpose sometimes must be found outside reproduction or childrearing. Or fulfilled through adoption or alternate means of being able to parent.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Yeah, I mean those are very profound questions.

Certain realities, certain modes of life must be taken because of some constrants, but at the level of statistical understanding, these are the anomoly, not a certain diversity.

What I mean by this is that, we can be poetic and be welcoming of all types of life, but when we look into the numbers themselves, they tell a much different story. There's a certain politics to goodness, but the language of engaging with it shouldn't come before the marco reality of it. Words might edify, but it's in the end good policy that gets the job done. I think it's within these tensions is that we find the very essense of humanity itself.

 

[Hourglass]

good policy

This could be an entire philosophical / moral / ethical discussion in itself but I’ll refrain because it varies locally and globally

 

[Hourglass]

Joy in life is contingent on society's perception of what joy is.

If this is true, this is probably why many people express lack of happiness, or are observed to express less occurrences of happiness these days. Society’s perception changes by the millisecond.

It shouldn’t be this way, should it?

To be intrinsically happy with oneself is to detach from the idea of self and to detach from the idea of the self being defined by a surrounding set of people.

And yet, we don’t need nothing - we all depend on something.

And yet, it feels dull to let things be.

 

[ZenRaiden]

If we focus on that, we will focus on whether the economy is working, or whether our politics is working.

The economy and politics don't work for short.
For longer answer, the amount of people that are poor, and people who get fucked over by politicians is way bigger than should be.
I mean US politicians waged several wars on their own behalf that people did not even ask for and wars that gave people nothing, but bigger national debt and bigger military budget. Obama, Trump and others exist because of idiots like us.
Yet society prevails despite these ideals.
Economy is not children.
Economy is people who make value.
Some kids do add value yes.
But most kids don't.

As for kids yes they can be purpose.
Yet when I was in school they ask me what I wanted to do.
No one ever said to have kids.
Purpose is definitely independent of kids.
You can find purpose in kids.
But I never heard anyone say its the only way.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Besides the reinvisioning of parenthood though, I always thought that mothers have it easier then men, because they're literally built with an teleological function within their bodies. In other words, they pretty much have a sense of purpose via their sex. Men don't have that built in purpose, we have to create it for our own, whether that being creating a family, achieving honor in business or other social virtues, whether that be intellectual or via reputation. It's a bit removed from the point, but when you lay it out, it's like.. women in a philosophical, existientialist sense, have it easier. Feminists might decry this as a limitation on their freedom and choices, but when you have no choices as a male, it can be extremely debilitating. It turns you into a ghost, powerless and without true agency.

So you are saying what now? That there is fixed point in the universe that we all have to take? I suppose that has been refuted.
If you take that fixed point like nuclear family for granted, then OK, be my guest I guess? I just find it ridiculous to anticipate joy from family. I sure hope people do derive joy from family, but given circumstances its not an automatic win.

 

[Old Things]

Reality seems to hit us around 32 years old. That's when men become conservative politically and when women want to start a family.

Pragmatism, mostly, is my guess. It's like getting an undergrad in philosophy or psychology and then you realize that is not going to pay the bills.

 

[Hourglass]

Pragmatism

Yes that’s it.

In trying to apply things of theoretical nature to reality, it is not easy, and thus there is an inherent lack of continuous happiness or detachment from the self throughout the process of being able to make something applicable.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Reality seems to hit us around 32 years old.

No not really. Its not reality. Its financial security that hits most people at 32. Hence not wanting to rock the boat anymore and settling down. Financial security and future prospects is what makes people want to have kids. If people had those at 19 they would have kids just as well. Unfortunately in countries like US people are financial secure at about 32, or they come close to having future prospect of financial security.

So its stability that makes people conservative. Society does not provide stability, and in capitalist society only money provides island of stability. No one will help you when you are 24 and have five hungry kids to feed. People are not stupid. So they opt to wait until they can have kids.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Right. But I think it's important to set our priorities straight, because if we rightly claim that our kids are of paramount importance, we then have to look into things that make their living enviornment better. If we focus on that, we will focus on whether the economy is working, or whether our politics is working. If you want progress you need an anchor, a source of direction where you can have all your actions flow from. We want freedom, but in what capacity and what sense? We want goodness, but by what means and for what purpose?

Most people anchor their potential in relationship with other people. A nun anchors this in her work towards people. The Pope same thing. The politician same thing.
The soldier same thing. The medic same thing. The samaritan same thing.
Everything we do in some capacity is for other people.

.....but if everyone does everything for everyone else, where is the individual????
..... where are you to benefit????
.... how can I help you or anyone if no one is individual, but a joyless blob????
.... you are talking about survival and only survival.
.... a worm has no joy, but it lives and survives.

You are homo sapiens, play, fun, entertainment, happiness are part of who you are.
You are not there to entertain kids. You are there to have fun WITH kids.
You and them, not just them.
Because kids don't want a joyless father who cannot have fun.
If your only source of joy is kids, then who the hell are you???

However the issues arise when we affect parenthood or get in the way of a healthy family experience. In short, all societal issues primarily arise from problems within the family.

Please define healthy, and not in biblical terms, or medical or moral terms.
But by your own definition. You know.... like an adult.
Because I have a bad feeling you don't know what the word even means.
You probably assume that having money and popping kids into the world means you are healthy. And if you think that I am sorry for you, but that would be the worst assumption. So before you start circular reasoning you ought to know what healthy means before you use the word.
If you don't its OK. That is the reason why we..... live to figure shit out.

mothers have it easier then men

Life is only as easy as we make it. People are good at making their own lives hell.
Man and women are biologically different in relation to kids.
Women have it easy in terms of providing for kids, from tit to emotional support, because that is how they are made, by nature or God.
But women also take the brunt of biological stress. Popping the kid out of a tiny hole, having post birth health issues, dealing with emotional fluctuations.
Men are often seen as providers, and security both from physical stance and financial stance. Men have it only easy or hard depending on how skilled or lucky they are, and how the circumstances of life let them.

 

[Puffy]

Hmm, in response to OP. I think when we're younger we're naturally more idealistic, energetic and grandiose in our dreams. As we get older we get more versed in the practicalities of the world and the many barriers we have to overcome to make them actual. Those dreams start to become sources of fatigue, a true mountain to climb, and we settle for less.

In a way I think this is wise and healthy, to accept that one's place in the world is small overall.

I also sympathise with the many challenges people go through. It's hard to stay on top of one's personal issues, finances, raise a family, and have the energy or money to pursue personal dreams.

There's a balance to be struck in being realistic about one's goals while also having a sense of purpose that comes from inside you and is animated by passion and deep care for what you do.

If I manage to navigate my life in such a way that I'm mentally healthy, have a career I'm passionate about, and a happy community and family life then I feel I'd have been quite successful overall.

 

[ZenRaiden]

There's a balance to be struck in being realistic

Your boss is your boss, because he was never realistic to begin with.

 

[Puffy]

There's a balance to be struck in being realistic

Your boss is your boss, because he was never realistic to begin with.
View attachment 7169

I'm not sure I understand your point, friend.

It's sappy but I'd add to my previous post the best purpose comes from the heart.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I'm not sure I understand your point, friend.

Bosses of 21th century have often unrealistic expectations.
Due to various circumstances societies often listen to this people.
I mean Alexander the Great is not called that for being told that taking over half of world empires is unrealistic.
Same for Ghenghist Khan.
Or Captain Picard.
Or Bill Gates.
Or Warren Buffet.
Or Elon Musk etc.
Realism has zilch to do with goals.
Goals are interesting to society, because no one has achieved them yet.
If you want to do something real. Who gets to define real???

 

[scorpiomover]

man, when i look around and see my friends (mostly early 30s), they're all slowly withering away. They all had dreams, even just 6-7 years ago. Now they're settling in for a slow death – with a wife, a mortgage, and a 9-5 job.

im just wondering, is it just a natural progression in life, or is it the burden of life that drains all their energy, or maybe it's the result of getting married?

When you get what you want, you settle in to enjoying what you have.

or perhaps dreams are foolish to begin with.

Most people's dreams are a method or strategy they came up with to achieve their actual dreams.

maybe it's just the fatal outcome of falling into routines. When i visit my childhood home, at the nearby store i can see the *same* people working there that worked there 20 years ago. They were in their early 20s back then - and probably thought it was just a temporary job.

If you don't have anyone supporting you by encouraging you to improve and periodically questioning you if you are fulfilling your life goals or not, then you're on your own, and it's easy to get stuck when you're on your own and there's no-one there to help you.

either way my verdict is that none of them are happy

Give them the choice of a different life: would the married man rather give up his wife & kids and enjoy the single life?

 

[Puffy]

I'm not sure I understand your point, friend.

Bosses of 21th century have often unrealistic expectations.
Due to various circumstances societies often listen to this people.
I mean Alexander the Great is not called that for being told that taking over half of world empires is unrealistic.
Same for Ghenghist Khan.
Or Captain Picard.
Or Bill Gates.
Or Warren Buffet.
Or Elon Musk etc.
Realism has zilch to do with goals.
Goals are interesting to society, because no one has achieved them yet.
If you want to do something real. Who gets to define real???

That's fair. I think it's problematic to aim to aspire towards the ideal of exceptional people like that though as it is an unrealistically high standard that's more likely to cause disappointment and burnout.

Most aspiring actors or writers can't land a job let alone create another Ulysses.

But again, I'd say this is reflective of my own values. If I'm healthy, happy, have a good community and family life I'd say they're the foundations for my life. If I can manage that while having a career in which I feel passionate and creatively satisfied then I'd say that's pretty successful.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Most aspiring actors or writers can't land a job let alone create another Ulysses.

I am talking about trade offs.

But again, I'd say this is reflective of my own values. If I'm healthy, happy, have a good community and family life I'd say they're the foundations for my life. If I can manage that while having a career in which I feel passionate and creatively satisfied then I'd say that's pretty successful.

You are making a trade off actually even though you fall into it passively by virtue of modern design.
Realistically we are not taught to make good trade offs in life.
Warren Buffet was not making a risky trade off.
Bill Gates was not making a risky trade off.
Wright Brothers were not making a risky trade off.
But they were investing into something that might have failed
Alexander the Great was making a sensible trade off.
If he were king he still could be stabbed on the throne by assassins like his father.
Going half way through the world and fighting was a risky trade off, but being king was still risky.

Today most people are told being in business is inevitably a risky trade off.
What most business people don't tell you is that making a reasonable trade off is possible.

Quality of trade off is in our hands and in our intellect.

When I watch things like Shark Tank a lot of people are making big and dangerous trade offs. They are thus not made for business world.

Even companies that go bankrupt are making reasonable trade off, because people who make money don't often lose their life. The crooks go to jail sure, but many go bankrupt and still end up with a yacht. They are the smarter version of Koch Brothers.

We are often told by TV and authorities that trade offs are risky.
That is because us mere plebs are not taught to make reasonable trade offs.

The skill to make a leap and good trade off is not beyond learning.

But we often think in linear terms. Dreams are linear, I do A and B and C and then dreams come true.

That is not always how dreams get realized.

Most dreams have inevitable ups and downs, but good trade offs pay well while the risk is low.
Most people are told to make it big you have to make a risky trade off. Which is actually false. But most people not possessing strategy for trade off do believe this motto as its easy to be convinced of it.

Dreams are trade offs, but making trade offs is the skill you need to realize them.
That part where you make your dream come true is often the easiest part.
Most people however focus only on the dream part, not how to make a reasonable trade off.

By media we are often told JUST DO IT, instead of just think about it.

Let me give you a challenge.

Think of some dream you want. Then think for it 10 minutes a day. How to make it happen without losing your current life within reason.
Most criminals, speculators, business men do this on daily basis 24 7 they think of trade offs every minute of their life.
That is why they are so good at what they do.
People who run on the knowledge school systems gave them never think of trade offs. They think stuff is just randomly lucky.
You can definitely tip your luck towards your goal I think more than you can realize.
In fact new self help books do talk about how to make luck your little bitch lot more.
Not everyone has to be a drug addict wolf of wall street hot shot.
Some people might just want a small dream like a bigger property where they want a glass house with rare orchids or a small business.

We are often taught to think of failure first, not success first.
Think negative first and you get loser mentality ingrained.
Think of all the people who are successful and hit high stakes dreams and you will see a positive trade off pattern.

Bill Gates was rich daddy boy.
Warren Buffet was senators boy.
Elon Musk was diamond mine daddys boy.
Wright brothers owned a lucrative company to begin with.
Alexander the great inherited a modern army and was educated in most modern warfare tactics.
So its clear reaching goals like theirs is unlikely.
But being middle class and secure means you still can shoot for the moon and hit the low orbit.

I am not saying this because I think you are wrong to have the life you have.
What I am saying is you still have long life ahead of you and you might get bored at one point.

 

[Puffy]

Most aspiring actors or writers can't land a job let alone create another Ulysses.

I am talking about trade offs.

But again, I'd say this is reflective of my own values. If I'm healthy, happy, have a good community and family life I'd say they're the foundations for my life. If I can manage that while having a career in which I feel passionate and creatively satisfied then I'd say that's pretty successful.

You are making a trade off actually even though you fall into it passively by virtue of modern design.
Realistically we are not taught to make good trade offs in life.
Warren Buffet was not making a risky trade off.
Bill Gates was not making a risky trade off.
Wright Brothers were not making a risky trade off.
But they were investing into something that might have failed
Alexander the Great was making a sensible trade off.
If he were king he still could be stabbed on the throne by assassins like his father.
Going half way through the world and fighting was a risky trade off, but being king was still risky.

Today most people are told being in business is inevitably a risky trade off.
What most business people don't tell you is that making a reasonable trade off is possible.

Quality of trade off is in our hands and in our intellect.

When I watch things like Shark Tank a lot of people are making big and dangerous trade offs. They are thus not made for business world.

Even companies that go bankrupt are making reasonable trade off, because people who make money don't often lose their life. The crooks go to jail sure, but many go bankrupt and still end up with a yacht. They are the smarter version of Koch Brothers.

We are often told by TV and authorities that trade offs are risky.
That is because us mere plebs are not taught to make reasonable trade offs.

The skill to make a leap and good trade off is not beyond learning.

But we often think in linear terms. Dreams are linear, I do A and B and C and then dreams come true.

That is not always how dreams get realized.

Most dreams have inevitable ups and downs, but good trade offs pay well while the risk is low.
Most people are told to make it big you have to make a risky trade off. Which is actually false. But most people not possessing strategy for trade off do believe this motto as its easy to be convinced of it.

Dreams are trade offs, but making trade offs is the skill you need to realize them.
That part where you make your dream come true is often the easiest part.
Most people however focus only on the dream part, not how to make a reasonable trade off.

By media we are often told JUST DO IT, instead of just think about it.

Let me give you a challenge.

Think of some dream you want. Then think for it 10 minutes a day. How to make it happen without losing your current life within reason.
Most criminals, speculators, business men do this on daily basis 24 7 they think of trade offs every minute of their life.
That is why they are so good at what they do.
People who run on the knowledge school systems gave them never think of trade offs. They think stuff is just randomly lucky.
You can definitely tip your luck towards your goal I think more than you can realize.
In fact new self help books do talk about how to make luck your little bitch lot more.
Not everyone has to be a drug addict wolf of wall street hot shot.
Some people might just want a small dream like a bigger property where they want a glass house with rare orchids or a small business.

We are often taught to think of failure first, not success first.
Think negative first and you get loser mentality ingrained.
Think of all the people who are successful and hit high stakes dreams and you will see a positive trade off pattern.

Bill Gates was rich daddy boy.
Warren Buffet was senators boy.
Elon Musk was diamond mine daddys boy.
Wright brothers owned a lucrative company to begin with.
Alexander the great inherited a modern army and was educated in most modern warfare tactics.
So its clear reaching goals like theirs is unlikely.
But being middle class and secure means you still can shoot for the moon and hit the low orbit.

I am not saying this because I think you are wrong to have the life you have.
What I am saying is you still have long life ahead of you and you might get bored at one point.

Just to clarify I don't mind what you'd like to do, I'm mostly writing to reflect my own experience and values.

I'm not interested in going deep into business or investment as I don't enjoy that, I'm interested in spending my time and making a living out of doing what I enjoy and find meaningful. I don't need lots of money to achieve that. I can master a vocation that I find purposeful out of what I have and make a living doing that.

To me, if that progresses into anything grander it's a consequence of me enjoying and getting better at something, identifying ideas and new ways of doing things as a result of mastering that and bringing those to fruition. But I don't set out to have a grandiose goal because I don't think that's a fair expectation for what creates a meaningful life.

Not everyone gets to be Charles Darwin. Most people in a similar field get to just be scientists with much more modest contributions. I'm saying that there's nothing wrong with that. And that even when you balance all the other concerns people have to deal with in life that it's even impressive.

When you look at life, it's very hard, and I think the expectations that can be put on everyday people is very high. Some people go their whole lives broken and never resolving traumas they experienced as children. Imagine if said person was able to do that and rebuild a strong connection with themselves and their community. That's a monumental achievement that shouldn't be diminished by what they did with their dreams or career or money. Why put the expectation on said person that they should be Alexander the Great or Warren Buffet as well, it's not a fair assessment of someone's life.

 

[Hourglass]

a wife, a mortgage, and a 9-5 job

Why is this (sometimes) viewed as undesirable?

 

[scorpiomover]

Right now, life everywhere is pretty bad.

Life is what we make it. I found that a lot of times modern world is way more disconnected from nature and natural connection that people in more poor world have.
For instance I find it hilarious that some people live a better life from health and happiness point of view than people in modern world.

Overshoot.

When someone wants to change something in their life, and it takes a long time and/or great difficulty to achieve it, then it usually becomes a habit. Once it's a habit, the person keeps doing it.

So even when the goal is achieved, or reaches its optimal level, the person can keep doing it until the brain recognises that the goal has been achieved, there is no danger anymore, and thus there's no reason to keep expending energy driving things further in that direction.

Business people who took 20 years to become rich, keep doing business. Even the mentally ill are now being treated with a trauma-induced approach, the idea that they are people who reacted reasonably in a traumatic situation, and then were no longer in that trauma, but kept up the same behaviour.

Normally, the brain's Parasympathetic Nervous System releases acetylcholine to do that. E.G. if you see a wild animal and run, your Sympathetic Nervous System pumps you full of dopamine, and you start running and running. Then when you're reasonably sure that the wild animal is nowhere near you, your PNS releases acetylcholine and your body slows down.

But that auto-correction doesn't seem to happen with people who have been through trauma.

It also only seems to occur much later with things that took a long time but brought the person a lot of benefits.

I mean people pay for vacations to go and have free time, when people in poor countries often times have more free time on their hands then they can handle.

Again, overshoot. Aiming to use one's time productively enough that one makes enough money to afford eating 3 meals a day, is a fine aim. But there's an optimal point. Beyond that optimal point, there are diminishing returns.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Why is this (sometimes) viewed as undesirable?

For me personally, its desirable idea, but realistically my neurology just does not work that way. I would not function well in this life style. I would crumble.
But I want to contribute to society and not become unhappy misanthrope, so I have to find a lifestyle where I can function 100 times better than in this life style and be happy on top of that.
Also lots of 9 to 5 jobs are not stimulating or interesting in terms of pay.
Lots of business people just want a drone.
Most of what my brain can do is not useful in 9 to 5 job.
I could do exactly this lifestyle, but relatively Id be useless to people around me, because I would be using 2 percent of my brain while rest of it is idle and useless.

 

[scorpiomover]

a wife, a mortgage, and a 9-5 job

Why is this (sometimes) viewed as undesirable?

Because it's mainly viewed as the job market's equivalent of trying to put a round peg into a square hole.

 

[ZenRaiden]

But that auto-correction doesn't seem to happen with people who have been through trauma.

That is exactly true for me. I respond as if people are source of trauma even when they are not. My brain interprets things through defensiveness. Its thus exhausting being around people.

Again, overshoot. Aiming to use one's time productively enough that one makes enough money to afford eating 3 meals a day, is a fine aim. But there's an optimal point. Beyond that optimal point, there are diminishing returns.

Hence I want to lay down a lifestyle where I can function.
I have a body and mind that work well. I even have the drive.
But my brain acts as though the aim is to avoid people at all cost, yet it needs to relate to people.
I am intellectually lucid enough to know that its bullshit from my mind.
It does not change how my mind works though. It still acts with momentum.
I am not certain whether you are saying that overshooting is bad or good?

 

[dr froyd]

a wife, a mortgage, and a 9-5 job

Why is this (sometimes) viewed as undesirable?

because unbeknownst to the victim of such circumstances, they have passed the event horizon, not even light can escape

 

[Hourglass]

a wife, a mortgage, and a 9-5 job

Why is this (sometimes) viewed as undesirable?

because unbeknownst to the victim of such circumstances, they have passed the event horizon, not even light can escape

It is interesting because all of these things are in theory and in reality “escapable” although not easily for some. I suppose these are all believed to be very long term commitments (not applicable to everyone of course).

Yet, this is just perception, as loving partnerships, home ownership, and having a job can all change.

Maybe this is the case of the “grass is always greener on the other side”.

A contrasting view:
I don’t covet the life that serial entrepreneurs have even though I admire many - I have seen them and have been employed by them. To survive with your own way or ways of making a living isn’t easy. It is insurmountably difficult. The passion must be so profound that it holds you up when things don’t work or things don’t provide enough for your sustenance. Either that, or you have someone wealthy in your network who is magically ok with covering all your attempted business’s losses, continuously, which isn’t likely because those who fund businesses are highly scruntinizing.