Normally I don't write too much about what I have been consuming by way of content, because I think it is kind of lazy. We live in a world that has made collecting information a kind of sport, but there is actually no point to holding a lot of it, if it isn't going to be applied to change behavior in some way, because that information is available on-demand. But, wisdom itself isn't the amount of information held, it is about turning it into knowledge (which I see as structured information) and being able to apply it at the right time to meet conditions.
Back in the 1980s, Trivial Pursuit was a popular game, but there was a different culture and set of conditions in order to be good at the game. Yes, memory was important to hold the information, but without the internet, the collection of the information was far more impractical and often, required experience, time, interest, and practice to obtain. Nowadays, what is the point?
But, the name of the game is also a give away as to the value of information - it is trivial. At least at the game level, because it isn't applied to change behavior. However, it also speaks to our collector mindset, where we are in pursuit of the trivial. Chasing to catch information that is relatively meaningless to us. And this is even more true especially these days, in a world where we have everything available. And collecting it makes us feel like we have learned something useful, even if it makes no impact on the way we live our lives.
Which is why I am sharing a talk that I have only started listening to on "Happiness" from the Peter Attia Drive podcast, with Arthur Brooks as the guest. It is only a couple hours long, but I don't have a lot of time spare to consume in large chunks. However, so far it has really resonated with me, as it has presented ideas that are pretty much how I think of these things too, and have written about for years here on Hive. However, it isn't because it supports my thinking that is compelling, it is that it brings in some of the science behind it too, whereas my thoughts are based on personal observation alone.
And, there was something that was mentioned and might be interesting for those who are into personality tests. This one categorizes people into four quadrants based on positive or negative affect, which is essentially how someone feels "positive" or "negative" emotions.
Take the {short test first,](https://arthurbrooks.com/build) but the four categories with overviews are,
Mad Scientist - feel both positives high, and negatives high
Cheerleader - feel positive emotions more than negative
Poet - feel negative more than positive.
Judge - rarely feel positives or negatives high
Congratulations, you’re a Poet! Yes, congratulations. As you know, you generally have low positive affect and high negative affect, or, put another way, you tend to feel negative emotions more than positive emotions. How, you might wonder, is this worthy of celebration?
Poets feel negative emotions deeply, which means they are highly attuned to emotional circumstances. This leads to a cascade of good qualities: Poets are empathetic friends, excellent listeners, and have a propensity to think critically about adverse consequences that could develop from personal or professional choices. Research also shows that people with higher negative affect are very creative (thus, a Poet). The greatest writers and artists, for example, often score highly on negative affect: They are able to tap into the complexities of human emotion better than anyone. The world needs Poets.
Yet being a Poet is not without its costs. Driven by their high negative affect, Poets tend to be anti-social, pessimistic about the future, and generally gloomy. Left unchecked, Poets tend to drag down morale and ostracize friends, family, and colleagues.
As a Poet, your complementary profile is a Cheerleader—people with high positive and low negative affect. Cheerleaders can help you address the costs of your affect profile. They can help you develop a more optimistic vision, encourage you to build stronger relationships, and boost your low positive affect. At the same time, your negative affect can help Cheerleaders see life more realistically and thus make better decisions.
Now, I don't put much stock in personality tests themselves, but spending some time reflecting on how we are is valuable in applying what we know for a better experience. And, while this conversation about happiness looks at feelings, it isn't one of those touchy-feely kinds of discussions. Instead, if anything, it is about how feelings are something we should be
are more wary of, something to be considered and managed, not something that should direct our behavior.
As said, this is a podcast that fills me with confirmation bias.
It doesn't mean I am wrong though.
The environment is filled with content of all kinds and that speaks to just about every facet of our lives, but we aren't using it well. Collecting information shouldn't be the goal, it isn't a skill or an achievement, because it is performed automatically by the many data collectors out there. At least in my opinion, we should be looking at what we know from the lens of how we are applying it as a sign of its worth to us. Knowing it isn't enough.
Happiness...
It shouldn't be as hard to achieve as we make it.
And if you do take the time to listen to the podcast and reflect on it, it really isn't that hard. We have built a life that looks for short benefits, pleasure - not one that builds true enjoyment.
It is obvious to me what we are missing.
Do you know?
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
