2/ Self-esteem is good for soldiers, cops, anyone who might make life-threatening mistakes under pressure
Conversation
Replying to
3/ For others, especially those doing creative work, it's a liability. Solution: keep identity small, as says paulgraham.com/identity.html
1
1
1
Replying to
4/ Are alternatively, keep your identity large but ironic. Either way, the key to operationalizing it in behavior is...
1
Replying to
5/ Keep your external standards at "survival" and internal standards at "must be fun"
1
4
Replying to
6/ Self-esteem is actually a very ill-posed construct that only belongs in highly credentialist organizations, an internalized superego
1
1
Replying to
7/ There is no such thing. All esteem is other-esteem. Healthier to recognize that primary source rather than program a proxy into your head
2
2
Replying to
8/ Robinson Crusoe on an island cannot have "self esteem" issues. He only has two standards: survival in external world, enjoyment in head
1
1
5
Replying to
9/ Aiming for high self-esteem is like fat supply chains. You insure against uncertainty in other-esteem through internal inventory.
1
1
Replying to
10/ Like fat supply chains, self-esteem an artifact of industrial age. Go lean instead. Zero inventory. NO self-esteem per 3/ and 4/
1
1
4
Replying to
11/ This means externalizing your self-esteem as other-esteem into quality relationships, not insuring against validation volatility
1
1
Replying to
12/ Alternate lens on self-esteem is attachment theory applied to paternalistic industrial age organizations: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attachmen
Replying to
13/ Industrial age humans needed self-esteem because their attachment to clumsy bureaucratic parents was insecure, like kids of bad parents
1
2
Replying to
14/ You can do better now, since you can choose relationships much more freely. Your attachment to society can be a lot more secure today.
2
Show replies
