The Corrupt Mind

In The Republic, there is a passage that describes what qualities a judge should be endowed with. The conversation takes place with Socrates.

Socrates: ‘The best way for a doctor to acquire skill is to have, in addition to his knowledge of medical science, as wide and as an early acquaintance as possible with serious illness; in addition he should have experienced all kinds of disease in his own person and not be of an altogether healthy constitution. For doctors don’t use their bodies to cure other people’s bodies – if so, they cannot allow their health to be or become bad – they use their minds; and if their mental powers are or become bad their treatment can’t be good.’

‘But with a judge it’s a matter of mind controlling mind. And the mind should not be brought up from its youth to associate with wickedness, or to run a whole range of crimes in order to get first-hand experience on which to be able to judge them quickly in other people, as the doctor does with diseases of the body: on the contrary, the mind must, while it is still young, remain quite without experience of or contact with bad characters, if its condition is to be truly good and judgments just. That is why people of good character seem simple when they are young, and are easily taken in by dishonesty – because they have nothing corresponding in themselves to give them a sympathetic understanding of wickedness.’

The point that is being made here is that a mind that is not corrupt should remain so to be able to be a good judge, since early exposure to wickedness would disrupt its proper functioning and interfere with it.

When you are young, you are yet to be impressed upon by the world. Your assumptions about people are good. It is only when you get older that you see the maliciousness in others, and even in yourself.

But this innocence that Plato talks about, the good person who in their youth seems simple, is not something that is washed away by the transition from childhood to adulthood. There are many people who maintain this innocence of character despite their encounters with malice. They are either not exposed to an extreme enough event, or they are working hard to preserve their mental model of the world.

They prefer to remain where they are, trapped inside a simplistic understanding of people, for such an understanding allows them to trust, to take risks, and to form relationships. There is no good that can be gained from extreme skepticism – even if merited.

You should not distrust people, and avoid them at all costs – it is not pragmatic. You should instead understand them. And once you have acquired a sophisticated understanding of human nature, it is then time to integrate this knowledge into your belief system. To reconcile your cognitive dissonance, to accept that each individual is both virtuous and sinister. That each individual aims for the good, but is selfish and has destructive motivations.

The problem in politics can be summarized as follows: each side refuses to acknowledge their own dark sides. They frame the other side as evil, while thinking of themselves as good. And it is the same in social life. You have those who presume their own innocence indirectly when they cast aspersions on others. Social shaming induces guilt which can lead to reform, so it cannot be said that casting aspersions is altogether fruitless, but when it is done pathologically, without properly considering the situation in its entirety, without holding one’s own self culpable, without taking stock of one’s own lack of self-control and lack of virtue, then there can only be net negative consequence.

The simple, innocent youth who grows up to be an adult does not remain young, nor innocent, but in their minds, they often do. And it is this mismatch between reality (what is) and what is perceived that results in both internal tension and external hostility.

It seems like cliched advice to always look at oneself before criticizing others, but it is necessary to do so, to avoid self-deception. The person you should fear most is yourself, not others who you may or may not encounter. You are permanently attached to yourself, you cannot escape your own mind or body, and so it is important to know what you are, and what you are not.

Clarity: The Alternative to Proverbs, Self-Help, and Rules to live By

 

Abundance is not always a good thing – in fact, it is often a crutch. Abundance breeds weak character and blurry vision, it leads to laziness and dependence. Abundance robs the soul of creativity. When there are no limitations, there is no challenge, and when there is no challenge, the mind becomes complacent, no longer spurred into action by stress. The hallmarks of necessity: deadlines, scarce resources, limited abilities, in contrast, inspire action, commitment, and creativity.

Necessity will force you to become effective, whereas abundance will convince you that you don’t have to.

A classic story is the Biblical tale of David and Goliath. The weaker David manages to overcome the monstrous Goliath, not because he has more resources, but because he was constrained by a few. Knowing he could not match his opponent in brute force, David was forced to innovate. He would not be considered a powerful soldier, many were preferable to him in the eyes of the king, but David perfected the art of using a slingshot by many hours of practicing shooting down birds in mid-flight. This gave him the ability to strike any opponent effectively. Goliath was large and powerful, a single blow from him would end the battle, but he was also slow and lethargic. Goliath’s weaknesses were David’s strengths. David was agile, he fought with more options, more creatively. He waited for the right opportunity, he concentrated his effort on one task, and it secured him an unlikely victory.

Jordan Peterson has repeatedly said that the primary aspect of being is limitation. Without limitations, there is no being. When the writers of the Superman comics gave him god like powers and no weaknesses, people got bored. When they wrote Kryptonite into the script, interest picked up again. If a challenge does not exist to make you suffer, then you will never improve, you will not experience the beauty of life. This is meant to convey the idea that our fragile existence is what gives our lives meaning. If we lived forever, we would see no value in anything.

Bruce Lee said, “I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times.”

You may have heard another version of what was said before, for these sentiments have grown in popularity. Another common belief is that it is not versatility that makes you dangerous, but specialization. A versatile well-rounded person only gives the illusion of competence. If an opportunity arises where the versatile man must apply his knowledge practically, and not for the purposes of pea-cocking or showboating to establish social capital – he will fail.

‘The jack of all trades is a master of none’ is a truism, and what it implies must be taken seriously. To not be a master means to remain in the realm of the superficial, and whatever is superficial, introductory, intermediate, is always insufficient, and often misleading. If you wish to become knowledgeable about everything, to compete in many different battles simultaneously, you exhaust your resources, energy, and time, and you will have nothing substantial to show for it. You will remain an amateur.

But the jack of all trades also has options and is more agile than the specialized person. The versatile individual does not depend on perfectly predictable circumstances, she can adjust. The bona fide expert is constrained by their own talents, sunk costs, and commitments. They are ripe for disruption by new technology and changing circumstances. If you decided to specialize in repairing fax machines thirty-five years ago, you’re in a rather precarious position now. And yet, if you merely kept your options open, you may have studied how to code in your thirties and salvaged your career.

While it is true that scarcity can be better than abundance, it often isn’t. And while it is true that specialization is a better strategy than generalization, it often isn’t either.

The Illusion of Knowledge

“A little knowledge is a dangerous thing” is one of the only proverbs you should remember. It is often the illusion of mastery that makes people dream of the impossible – that is, the things that will not happen. The hapless American Idol contestant with self-belief that emerged from polite, merciful words she received from close friends and family at the dinner table, or the rookie gambler who thinks he’s figured out all the “nooks and crannies” of the game and proceeds to bet everything he has on the assumption that he is right, because he has had many conversations with veteran gamblers who have passed down their wisdom to him.

This is the same kind of illusion that will prevent people from seeing reality for what it is. It is difficult to hold two contradictory positions such as ‘I do not know enough’ and ‘I have the ability to win’. In favoring the more egotistical option, the latter statement, you will underestimate your own ignorance. A familiar variation of this idea is the Dunning-Kruger effect: People who think they’re experts in a field because they have yet to walk the narrow path that leads to the mountain of knowledge that they have yet to scale.

The illusion of knowledge leads people to take things for granted. Some people will always believe the narrative that scarcity is better than abundance, others will only accept the opposite narrative.

Illusions protect their owners from understanding their realistic limitations – in terms of abilities and knowledge – this is what prevents them from truly understanding the world. And this is different from mastery, it is not only the case that knowing your weaknesses will help you master a subject, but it will help you abort a falling ship. Imagine you have been working for a project for three months – this involved a couple of friends, and a significant investment of your time, but you have not seen any concrete results yet. Now you are faced with a difficult choice: to continue moving forward, or to cut your losses?

If you decide to move forward, you should only do so because you have understood what you need to change to possibly see results. If you decide to quit, it should be because you have realistically assessed your situation, and have concluded that your weaknesses are too many, and your efforts would produce better results if they were invested elsewhere.

The Illusion of ‘Never Quit’ and ‘Cut Your Losses’

There are two mistakes that can possibly be made. The first is quitting too early because of a distorted outlook that was too pessimistic, and the other mistake you make is to relentlessly fight a losing battle until your last breath. In this situation, ‘quitting is not for losers’

 “It ain’t what you know don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” – Mark Twain

The Illusion of Scarcity

Because a clear illusion of abundance exists, it is tempting to believe that scarcity is always better. Yes, limitations are necessary, they breed creativity, they build stronger hearts and minds, but they can also be blinding. Scarcity obscures the big picture. When you are constrained by time, you do not think about the long term, but only the short term. You can only see what is directly in front of you.

The person who succeeds through adversity, need not have succeeded because of adversity, but despite it. Malcolm Gladwell, in his book Outliers makes the point that limitations are often what propels the individual to success. He makes the point by explaining the concept of the inverted U.

But as Nassim Taleb noted in his book “Antifragile”, it is false to conclude that a correlation here implies causation. The holocaust survivor did not become a tough person because he survived the holocaust – she survived the holocaust because she was a tough person.

Scarcity can be a crutch – the same way abundance can be a crutch. Our natural tendency is to find a formula or a rule that explains the world to us in simple terms, but reality is much more complex.

Sometimes, abundance can give people second chances, time to reflect and reinvent themselves, it can imbue them with a sense of assurance and confidence, and it can make them more forward thinking, and balanced in the way they live. Sometimes, being a jack of all trades can be very useful, especially in times of uncertainty and change.

On the other hand, abundance can result in complacency and laziness. Many individuals manage to overcome scarcity, the rags to riches stories are many and they convey an important truth – that circumstances do not always determine a person’s fate. A person who is forced to succeed, to study well, to get the best job they can, often does. If you sacrifice enough for success, you will achieve it.

Yet many people have sacrificed a lot for success and have not achieved it. Why? Because sacrifice is not enough, but neither is environment, nor one’s own biology. It is a confluence of factors, and the important thing is not to memorize the factors so that they can be used in arguments. The point isn’t to find data that supports your worldview and point to it like it is evidence of anything conclusive.

What we need is a more nuanced understanding of how scarcity and abundance operate on different people. Individuals respond to circumstances differently. Here is a matrix that represent four distinct possibilities.

Abundance, Success Abundance, Failure
Scarcity, Success Scarcity, Failure

Individual A will succeed no matter what, whether conditions are abundant or not. Individual B will always fail. Individuals C and D have peculiar capabilities and temperaments that will either help them succeed in times of abundance or succeed in times of scarcity. C will succeed in times of abundance only, and D will succeed in times of scarcity only.

Individual A will use his time well. Individual B will use his time badly. Individual C will succeed in the right environment but will react badly under pressure. Individual D will succeed under pressure but will be complacent in abundant circumstances.

This is to say that no general rule can be applied to everyone. If there was such a rule, it would have been discovered, and there would be no debate – in particular, the debate that exists between the right and the left in politics.

The leftists think that individuals can succeed when put in the right circumstances, If you only give people the right opportunities, the right mentorship, resources and social conditions, then there is nothing they can’t accomplish. And people on the right think that individuals succeed only through hard work – the circumstances don’t matter very much. If a community is suffering from poor literacy rates and a lot of crime, it is because the individuals of this community have collectively chosen a culture of failure. The leftists disagree, they will tell you that it is only circumstances that matter. Of course, this is a rough sketch, or a caricature of the two opposing sides on this issue.

‘There is always three sides to every story. Your version, his version, and the truth.’

Reality is different, and the truth is much more subtle.

Clarity

Have Presence of Mind. The child of a happy promptitude of spirit. Owing to this vivacity and wideawakeness there is no fear of danger or mischance. Many reflect much only to go wrong in the end: others attain their aim without thinking of it beforehand. There are natures of Antiperistasis who work best in an emergency. They are like monsters who succeed in all they do offhand, but fail in aught they think over. A thing occurs to them at once or never: for them there is no court of appeal. Celerity wins applause because it proves remarkable capacity; subtlety of judgment, prudence in action. – Baltasar Gracian 

The ancient Egyptians worshiped Horus, the falcon-headed deity, the eye on top of the pyramid. Horus symbolized attention – the highest value among the ancient Egyptians. Paying attention will give you clarity. Knowledge can be confusing, contradictory, and irrelevant. It is necessary to accumulate knowledge, but it is a mistake to depend on it completely. Attention will lead to clarity – an unadulterated vision of reality.

The only valid self-help advice that can be applied by anyone is to have more clarity, to properly weigh their situation, and understand how to best exploit it.

If you live in conditions of scarcity, you must use deprivation to push yourself beyond your natural limits. You should be simultaneously wary of short-term thinking for it might trap you in a place you don’t want to be trapped in. Conditions of scarcity will push you towards making better use of your time, but you can choose to rebel against this impulse. You shouldn’t. Allow necessity to be a tailwind rather than a headwind.

If you live in conditions of abundance, you need to make the most of your time. Abundance can help generate positive outcomes for certain people if exploited properly. That is, if your time is abundant, don’t spend it wasting your time on frivolous things, as tempting as it is, focus on areas in life that are truly important. Since you will be able to more easily recover from failure – you will undoubtedly improve with time in any endeavor that you choose.  At the same time, you should fight the forces of complacency for they will inevitably manifest itself and dominate your attention.

What is always required is clarity. When you have clarity, you understand what could go wrong in your own specific situation, and what often goes right. There is no generic formula to follow. You have to try multiple strategies, you have to experiment in both belief and doubt, you should take life seriously at times, and at another to understand its absurdity. When you have clarity, you don’t need strategies to follow, but strategies to understand. It is not important to know that ‘biding your time’ is a good thing, it is important to know when it is a good thing, and when exactly, it is not such a good thing.

Even this rule: to have clarity, is not sufficient, for there are times when you should allow yourself to explore things you don’t understand, and this requires you to suspend your urge for clarity. But if you want to limit the ways in which you deceive yourself, then you must start thinking clearly.

Be Spotless

Be Spotless: the indispensable condition of perfection. Few live without some weak point, either physical or moral, which they pamper because they could easily cure it. The keenness of others often regrets to see a slight defect attaching itself to a whole assembly of elevated qualities, and yet a single cloud can hide the whole of the sun. There are likewise patches on our reputation which ill-will soon finds out and is continually noticing. The highest skill is to transform them into ornament. So Caesar hid his natural defects with the laurel. – Baltasar Gracian (The Art of Worldly Wisdom)

The common, cliched advice is to be open about your weaknesses, but this serves no purpose. If you reveal your weaknesses to others, they will be exploited. You not only unlock the possibility of others exploiting you with the information they have, but they will respect you less. Revealing your flaws signals a weakness of character. They will see that you cannot control your emotions, and this will diminish from your credibility. Napoleon was one of the most accomplished generals in history, and yet,  his chief diplomat Talleyrand successfully managed to make a fool of him a number of times. One in particular was when Talleyrand helped spread rumors that he was conspiring against Napoleon in secret.

He knew that Napoleon would reveal his biggest weakness: his short temper. He knew that Napoleon would not be able to contain his anger after he had heard news of a conspiracy against him. And he knew this because the great general had revealed this weakness to him in the past in multiple occasions. He gave away a valuable tell.

The cunning Talleyrands of the world do the same; they pay attention to what your weaknesses are, and then they patiently wait for the appropriate moment to expose them. Everyone is a victim of their own psychology. When you understand someone’s psychology, you can find the right triggers. The only defense is to conceal this information. This requires self-control and self-awareness. The cunning know how to extract useful information when you least expect it, when your guard is down, tired, or unfocused.

After Napoleon’s burst of outrage against Talleyrand, when he resorted to personal insults about the latter’s wife – hinting that she was having an affair, the politicians in the room took note of this character flaw. At the same time, Napoleon’s fit of anger was contrasted with Talleyrand’s coolness and nonchalance. This put Napoleon’s credibility at question, how could a leader of a nation, a person in such an important position, have such little control over their temperament? This was question, when it was pondered over in the minds of observers, dutifully accomplished the goal that Talleyrand had from the start.

 

How to Build Self Control?

Napoleon and Talleyrand
Napoleon and Talleyrand (far-left)

The Power of Silence

If you have ever experienced regret after an encounter with someone, where you may have said too much then you understand how easily your emotions can get the better of you. The truth is that no matter how rational you think you are, your emotions are much more powerful. When a certain screw has been twisted, you will enter into a frenzied state, where all calmness and rationality has left you.

In fact, losing your cool is such a common phenomenon that people have happily exploited it for ages. If you personally want to find out what someone else is hiding from you, driving them to their emotional breaking point is a very effective way of doing so. Assume that this person harbors hidden feelings of resentment towards you, assume this person is someone you consider a close friend. Because of your history, you will not normally suspect any malicious thoughts from their side and behave accordingly, never provoking them or pressing them. But if one day, you have an argument, and you push them towards the edge, their true emotions will shine through. It is almost impossible for them to remain in control of their words. The more room you give them to maneuver, the more rope you are giving them to hang themselves with.

If you suspect your girlfriend or boyfriend is cheating on you, do not stupidly accuse them of anything explicitly, but patiently prod them until they make an error. They will give you contradictory responses. Women are excellent at doing this, it is almost a natural tendency for them. It is the indirect pursuit of truth, and for the simple minded and naive, it is an inconceivable tactic, yet it is the most effective.

You must train yourself to never say more than necessary. There’s a saying in arabic that translates to: “Say less words, make fewer mistakes.” If you are unpracticed in the art of concealing knowledge and you are the type of person who doesn’t know how to meticulously craft the right words for every occasion, then the best defensive tactic you can use is to keep quiet.

Train yourself to listen. It is a truly underrated skill to be silent.

“Shape clay into a vessel; It is the space within that makes it useful. Cut doors and windows for a room; it is the holes which make it useful. Therefore benefit comes from what is there; usefulness from what is not there.” – Lao Tzu

In the same way, think of a conversation as a physical object like a vessel. How useful and fruitful a conversation is depends on the pauses of silence that both parties are charitable enough to give each other. You do not only want to train yourself to listen so that you can extract hidden truths from the other person but because you want to know what they really think. You want to know what they really think because if lies persist into the future, then resentment will build up, and you will experience much more damaging manifestations of their built up resentment in surprising and undesirable ways.

The remedy is simple: silence. Pay attention to what they have to say, listen to every word. Do not interrupt them. Do not continue their sentences – that is your ego getting in the way, that is just you trying to still feel relevant to the conversation. It is you saying ‘I’m here, don’t forget about me, I have opinions too’! Don’t fall for your own childish compulsions. Instead, focus on what the other person has to say and do not respond until you have formed in your mind a coherent thought. Do not rush.

The other thing you must train yourself to do is to prepare yourself mentally before the conversation. If there is someone who knows how to push your buttons and provoke you, it is only because you trust their opinion. But this is highly irrational. Why take their opinion seriously? Think about how many people there are in the world, think about how many highly intelligent and knowledgeable people fail to agree on even the most fundamental issues. If you take your friend’s opinion seriously, it is not because they are a superior judge of character, but because you have an emotional connection to them. What they think matters to you. But once you acknowledge that your trust in them is purely emotional, then you are now better prepared than before.

Whereas you used to ruminate on what words were said, now you have a more reasonable estimate of their incompetence, you can take them less seriously, and this will allow you to be more calm and rational when speaking to them.

The Prepared Mind

People often get frustrated when the other person is too clam, and this I find very amusing. The irritated and the out of control hate it when they encounter someone who can keep their emotions in check. Talleyrand, the French politician, endlessly amused himself and his colleagues by provoking Napoleon. And he eventually succeeded in getting Napoleon to self-destruct.

The frustrated and the emotional are unprepared, they are untrained. Do not make the same mistake. Alfred Hitchcock used to make sure that every single detail in the film he was shooting was studied thoroughly beforehand. He did this because he hated having to endure the endless squabbles among the people he was working with. So he quietly did his job and once he was confident in the end result, he paid no attention to the bickering and the petty fights that happened around him. He was unfazed because he was experienced enough to expect these emotional outbursts to occur, and he knew that he was getting what he wanted – his own vision implemented.

Don’t allow the Talleyrands of the world to get the better of you. Always be cooler than they are. And like Hitchcock, never leave things to chance. Do not get involved in petty politics, it will only distract you and cloud your judgement. Make the tendency to become emotional, to say more than necessary, to lose your temper a fault that you can exploit in others, rather than a personal vulnerability. This can happen through repeated exposure and a changed mindset.

A novice poker player can’t help but react to his hands. He will sit relaxed with a joyful attitude through many rounds, leaning back on his chair and stretching his legs out nonchalantly. But once two aces show up, he shoots straight up, his hands automatically fold on each other, the smile on his face is immediately replaced with a somber look, and he suddenly becomes very quiet, making as little conversation as possible. He means business!

In life, you start out as a novice poker player, revealing everything that you think and feel. Children are notorious for spilling the family secrets because they are untrained. Yet many adults are no better, and worse, the secrets they know about are more dangerous. But they cannot contain themselves, they have not practiced enough. Don’t make the same mistake.

How The Weak Link Deceives

In the game of deception, no character is more potent and deadly than the weak link. You should not only be wary of those that strut their feathers proudly, they are obvious targets and have obvious weak points. You should also be wary of are those who are quiet, disgruntled, and weak-willed. They craft a delicate facade that convinces everyone around them that they are powerless, and that they are constantly preyed upon. These Machiavellian naturals only feign weakness to fool you.

The weak link is irrational. He only acts out of selfish instinct but has convinced himself and others around him that he is not selfish – that he is in fact virtuous. Finding himself losing the power struggle, the weak link must find a chink in the armor of others, and this is often compassion. If the weak link can garner empathy from others, then he can gain in stature and political strength. He does so by appealing to principles that he neither believes in nor follows, but he knows that these principles are universally recognized. He does not have a personal philosophy, but understands which values the gullible fall for. He tries to believe in his bullshit but he fails to do so as his regular behavior does not exhibit any adherence to a philosophy of compassion. The weak link regularly spends his time pursuing selfish modes of action but he is suspiciously uncritical of his own behavior. In fact, this lack of self-awareness and personal responsibility is the reason he has become a weak link.

His master strategy is to appeal to fairness. Since it is in everyone’s best interest to play a fair game, it is difficult to reject the weak link’s call for greater fairness. And yet, even under fair conditions, the weak link refuses to play the game because he lacks competence, focus, and resolve.

The weak link is a perpetual seeker of shortcuts. By victimizing himself, by appearing to be the biggest loser of a rigged game, he garners sympathy from other big losers. You should avoid these people, do not associate with them, for if you do, they will eventually corrupt your mind. It is naive to believe that you can change people, but it is more naive to believe that you cannot be changed.

The Courtier

There is a character in society that has for thousands of years evoked outrage and envy –  the courtier. This character is very much alive today. Who is the courtier? He is the king’s companion, the teacher’s pet, the adviser, aide, henchman.

The courtier’s strategy is extreme pragmatism. The courtier understands that the king has the power and he has learned that defying the king would only lead to negative consequences. So he implements his subtle mastery of interpersonal skills in his interactions with the king, flattering him while at the same time disclosing valuable information.

The courtier believes that it is necessary to get the king’s blessings, but knows that he is expendable. He knows that the king is powerful and has many other potential courtiers at his disposal. Thus the courtier constantly feeds the king a steady diet of information and flattery. This information needn’t convey the real interests of the courtier for he is not interested in his own entertainment, but predominantly seeks the satisfaction of the king. Likewise, he needn’t be sincere in his use for flattery, for it is used as a device of manipulation.

The courtier’s main battle is to prove that he is irreplaceable since this is counter to reality. Here is where his genius is most required, but also where his frailties are most deeply exposed. When the courtier tries to impress the king, he takes a risk by doing so. There is the possibility of failure. If the courtier does not succeed in carrying out the mission he promised, his reputation will be tarnished in the eyes of the king, and there can be nothing more debilitating and embarrassing to him than this.

But the courtier is shrewd and will not take unnecessary risks. He will constrain himself to the realm of the achievable. It is not so much the extent of what can be achieved, but rather, the fact of achievement itself that the courtier is after. Remember, he wants to build credibility with the king and this requires a consistent streak of victories. The courtier’s eternal rival is the indentured servant.

The indentured servant also exists in the king’s royal court, but he is treated badly. He is given the mundane tasks and unnecessary work. The servant despises the skilled courtier because he sees in him an unfulfilled ideal. The servant has convinced himself that by being obedient, he will gain favor with the king – that all his good works will be repaid in kind. But the servant inevitably discovers that this is not the case. As he neglects his himself further for the service of the king, he sees that the courtier is being showered with gifts, attention, and trust. Here the servant’s blood boils and he begins to seek revenge, not on the king, but on the courtier.

On the other hand, the courtier sees the servant as an unrighteous version of himself, an undeserving, lazy, and stupid imitation of his art. The courtier cajoles and plans and entertains while the scornful servant merely does what he is told and expects the same benefits.

In your own court, whether at work or in your relationships with people, take note of who the king, servant, and courtier are. They are the archetypal characters of the power hierarchy. Whenever there have been kings, there have always been courtiers and servants.

Blindly Furious Diligence

Blindly furious diligence, for example, the typical virtue of an instrument, is represented as the way to riches and honour, and as the most beneficial antidote to tedium and passion : but people are silent concerning its danger, its greatest dangerousness. Education proceeds in this manner throughout: it endeavours, by a series of enticements and advantages, to determine the individual to a certain mode of thinking and acting, which, when it has become habit, impulse and passion, rules in him and over him, in opposition to his ultimate advantage, but ” for the general good.” How often do I see that blindly furious diligence does indeed create riches and honours, but at the same time deprives the organs of the refinement by virtue of which alone an enjoyment of riches and honours is possible; so that really the main expedient for combating tedium and passion, simultaneously blunts the senses and makes the spirit refractory towards new stimuli!

– Nietzsche, The Gay Science

Don’t get stuck in one path for too long, especially if it gives you what you want. The most powerful form of self-deception is the one you trust the most.

Nietzsche describes an individual that is too familiar; the lawyer who has spent too many years honing his craft, training his mind to think and feel a certain way. Careful and analytical, he becomes blind to life’s pleasures, and to the things that can justify his sacrifices.

The foregoing of too much for too little is not a typical problem – it is usually the reverse for most people. But if you belong in the former category, you usually have no way of knowing how you are being blinded by your own diligence. An instrument is suitable for this kind of intensity, but not so much an agent – that is, if you wish to remain an agent. The person that wants to be free must not be too efficient, otherwise, they become nothing but the tool. Their identity becomes inseparable from their function.

You may be effective to society and gain the material rewards you crave, but you have forgotten how to enjoy them. Your laborious lifestyle has subdued your senses. This doesn’t mean that you should not work hard or pursue a challenging career, but it is important to routinely break away from routine.

When you disrupt the regular flow of activity that you are engulfed in, you gain a fresh perspective, and a new appreciation for life. It is the antidote to one of the most pernicious forms of self-deception.