This astonishingly direct quote caught my eye recently, from the blunt yet always thought-provoking Wall Street Playboys blog:
"Changing an Opinion: No point here. Unless someone is completely new to a topic there is no point in changing their opinion. It won't happen and if you're right they will simply dislike you because their ego took a hit (you were right and they were wrong). This is not a good way to win at life. Instead of trying to change opinions make a decision on if the person has already made a strong opinion. This is the real trick. If someone is 100% new to a topic then feel free to provide an opinion. If they already have an opinion, just agree with it and take their side of the argument. Besides. In order to have your own strong opinion you should be able to argue the other side with ease… This will save you a large amount of time and we can't over state that enough: 1) figure out if they have a strong opinion – takes a few minutes, 2) then decide to either agree *or* give an actual opinion (if they have an opinion just agree).
In addition, if you read this paragraph and disagree, we think you have a good point and things aren't black and white so there are definitely grey areas (see if you catch the joke)."
One of the reasons I wanted to write a post about this quote was to remind myself to not be like either person in situations like this. Don't be the guy trying to change somebody else's strongly-held opinion... but also, don't be the other guy, the one who's rigidly ego-attached to his own strongly-held opinion such that he dislikes somebody for the horrible crime of having a differing view.
So, here's my four bullet point checklist for any situation where people ask for (or offer!) opinions:
1) When someone asks your opinion, ask back: "What do you think?" or "What's your view?"
2) If the person does not have an already formed opinion, you may consider the idea of sharing your opinion. Maybe.
3) If the person does have an already-formed opinion, smile, nod and agree. Save time and energy!
And, last:
4) Don't have ego attachments to the rightness or wrongness of your opinions. Much of what we think we know is wrong anyway, we just haven't found it out yet.
Readers, what do you think?
READ NEXT: What Underwear Teaches You About Saving Time AND Money
Tuesday, November 28, 2017
Tuesday, November 21, 2017
Rebellion Practice
"I just demonstrated to myself and the world around me that I'm not controlled by it."
--Stephen Guise, from How to Be an Imperfectionist
********************************
I just finished a striking little book: How to Be an Imperfectionist by Stephen Guise. First of all, let me recommend it--highly--to Casual Kitchen readers. Today I'd like to share just one of the many, many good ideas in it: The idea of practicing "rebellion."
First, a little background. Guise's book is for people who struggle with perfectionism, and one of the central themes of his book is to stop letting your perfectly reasonable desire to do things "well" freeze you from doing things at all.
That our desire to "do things well" could actually subvert us might be a counterintuitive idea for some readers. But think about it: if you can't do something well, it's, well, kind of embarrassing. Our egos hate the idea that other people will see us suck--perhaps suck badly--at something. As a result, our egos will generally try to protect us from embarrassment by giving us rationalizations for not trying in the first place. And of course these rationalizations always seem like real reasons in the moment. No one who rationalizes realizes it--that's how rationalizing works. In fact if you look at this through the lens of evolutionary psychology, this ego activity could even be seen as a survival mechanism.
However, if you think about what the source of that embarrassment is, it's our internal assumptions about other peoples' expectations. So, the idea of "practicing rebellion" gets at rejecting or even defying those expectations. As well as our own.
Thus practicing rebellion means seeking out rejection, discomfort and even embarrassment. It means, as I once phrased it here in another post, "running towards humps." And it means not being a good little boy (or girl), obediently doing all the things we're told to do by our egos, by our peer group, by our modern consumer-driven society, and so on. Rebel.
It's up to you to choose what your rebellion might be, and you can feel free to start small. In his book, Stephen Guise shares some modest examples of his own, such as lying down in public places, singing out loud in public, or talking to strangers.
I'll confess, neatniks like me can't lie down in public places, and I definitely don't want to subject the world to my singing. As far as talking to strangers, that's such a perfectly normal behavior for me that I'd have to rebel the other way and not talk to strangers. The point, of course, is to each his own. You have to pick the type of rebellion that suits you.
Here's a list of possible ways you might practice rebellion, some cribbed directly from Guise's book, others I brainstormed on my own. Feel free to add your own ideas!
Rebelling against a typical way of living
Rebelling against any standard or expectation
Rebelling against "play-it-safe" living
Rebelling against the urge to seek acceptance or approval from others.
Rebelling against expected comportment in a given situation
Rebelling against consumerism, against solving problems by making a purchase
Rebelling against talking about politics or the media's latest outrage du jour
Rebelling against standard relationship types (not marrying, etc.)
Rebelling against the dietary conventions of those around you
Rebelling against fashion or clothing conventions (have an unusual hairstyle or clothing)
Rebelling against gadget trends
Rebelling against Facebook or other false/artificial ways to be "connected"
Rebelling against concern over mistakes
Take a sabbatical in the middle of a successful career
Drive a crappy car, even if you can afford a nice one
Have a radically unusual hobby or pastime
Put yourself into odd or uncomfortable social situations deliberately
... and so on.
Note that we can already surmise a few major side benefits from some of these practices. For example, practicing rebellion against consumerism will make you wealthy. Practicing rebellion against things like discussing politics will make you happier. And so on. What's not to like?
Toward your own identity
The point is to run toward that flinch/embarrassment reflex that we all have rather than shying away from it (for more on the flinch see here and here). Consider it a daily kata to train our egos to become less fragile to embarrassment and the perceived judgment of others.
As Stephen Guise phrases it: "It's very desirable to have a desensitized embarrassment reflex, because it brings you freedom."
What he means is here is this is a step towards finding your own identity. Most of us simply participate, without realizing it, in a set of behaviors and identity characteristics established for us by our society, peers and family. So, by choosing to rebel against this "imposed identity" which has been set for you by others, you become more free to seek out an identity that's truly and inherently you.
Obviously rebellion practice can be done at any level, and I encourage you to think about it both metaphorically and literally, and practice your own acts of "rebellion" to the level you consider appropriate.
"Those who need approval don't know who they are." - Stephen Guise
Read Next: Why I Clip Coupons (and Why You Should Too)
--Stephen Guise, from How to Be an Imperfectionist
********************************
I just finished a striking little book: How to Be an Imperfectionist by Stephen Guise. First of all, let me recommend it--highly--to Casual Kitchen readers. Today I'd like to share just one of the many, many good ideas in it: The idea of practicing "rebellion."
First, a little background. Guise's book is for people who struggle with perfectionism, and one of the central themes of his book is to stop letting your perfectly reasonable desire to do things "well" freeze you from doing things at all.
That our desire to "do things well" could actually subvert us might be a counterintuitive idea for some readers. But think about it: if you can't do something well, it's, well, kind of embarrassing. Our egos hate the idea that other people will see us suck--perhaps suck badly--at something. As a result, our egos will generally try to protect us from embarrassment by giving us rationalizations for not trying in the first place. And of course these rationalizations always seem like real reasons in the moment. No one who rationalizes realizes it--that's how rationalizing works. In fact if you look at this through the lens of evolutionary psychology, this ego activity could even be seen as a survival mechanism.
However, if you think about what the source of that embarrassment is, it's our internal assumptions about other peoples' expectations. So, the idea of "practicing rebellion" gets at rejecting or even defying those expectations. As well as our own.
Thus practicing rebellion means seeking out rejection, discomfort and even embarrassment. It means, as I once phrased it here in another post, "running towards humps." And it means not being a good little boy (or girl), obediently doing all the things we're told to do by our egos, by our peer group, by our modern consumer-driven society, and so on. Rebel.
It's up to you to choose what your rebellion might be, and you can feel free to start small. In his book, Stephen Guise shares some modest examples of his own, such as lying down in public places, singing out loud in public, or talking to strangers.
I'll confess, neatniks like me can't lie down in public places, and I definitely don't want to subject the world to my singing. As far as talking to strangers, that's such a perfectly normal behavior for me that I'd have to rebel the other way and not talk to strangers. The point, of course, is to each his own. You have to pick the type of rebellion that suits you.
Here's a list of possible ways you might practice rebellion, some cribbed directly from Guise's book, others I brainstormed on my own. Feel free to add your own ideas!
Rebelling against a typical way of living
Rebelling against any standard or expectation
Rebelling against "play-it-safe" living
Rebelling against the urge to seek acceptance or approval from others.
Rebelling against expected comportment in a given situation
Rebelling against consumerism, against solving problems by making a purchase
Rebelling against talking about politics or the media's latest outrage du jour
Rebelling against standard relationship types (not marrying, etc.)
Rebelling against the dietary conventions of those around you
Rebelling against fashion or clothing conventions (have an unusual hairstyle or clothing)
Rebelling against gadget trends
Rebelling against Facebook or other false/artificial ways to be "connected"
Rebelling against concern over mistakes
Take a sabbatical in the middle of a successful career
Drive a crappy car, even if you can afford a nice one
Have a radically unusual hobby or pastime
Put yourself into odd or uncomfortable social situations deliberately
... and so on.
Note that we can already surmise a few major side benefits from some of these practices. For example, practicing rebellion against consumerism will make you wealthy. Practicing rebellion against things like discussing politics will make you happier. And so on. What's not to like?
The point is to run toward that flinch/embarrassment reflex that we all have rather than shying away from it (for more on the flinch see here and here). Consider it a daily kata to train our egos to become less fragile to embarrassment and the perceived judgment of others.
As Stephen Guise phrases it: "It's very desirable to have a desensitized embarrassment reflex, because it brings you freedom."
What he means is here is this is a step towards finding your own identity. Most of us simply participate, without realizing it, in a set of behaviors and identity characteristics established for us by our society, peers and family. So, by choosing to rebel against this "imposed identity" which has been set for you by others, you become more free to seek out an identity that's truly and inherently you.
Obviously rebellion practice can be done at any level, and I encourage you to think about it both metaphorically and literally, and practice your own acts of "rebellion" to the level you consider appropriate.
"Those who need approval don't know who they are." - Stephen Guise
Read Next: Why I Clip Coupons (and Why You Should Too)
Tuesday, November 14, 2017
What Barefoot Running Taught Us About Expensive Sneakers (And What Nike and Others Really Don’t Want You To Know)
"You're definitely gonna want to pay a lot of money for good quality sneakers. I mean, seriously, if you go running in those $29.99 loser no-name running shoes, you'll hurt your knees! Or your iliotibial band. Or something. You'll definitely hurt something.
Forget those cheap shoes. These $175 running shoes are far better. Mass produced, yet designed to fit your feet. And they're built for comfort, with extra padding to absorb all those shocks to your body."
Readers, this is the basic marketing message behind high-end sneaker brands. For many, it's highly persuasive. After all, how dumb would it be to take a chance on some no-name pair of sneakers... and maybe hurt yourself. Right?
But then, something odd happened.
Some ten or so years ago, "barefoot running" became all the rage. And it raised questions the sneaker industry didn't want you asking. For example, a thoughtful if sarcastic sneaker buyer might ask, "Now hold on a minute: First I had to buy overpriced cushiony sneakers to protect myself from injury. And now you're telling me I don't even need shoes?"
But it gets worse: it turns out that many if not most running injuries result from protecting ourselves too much. All that padding in all those ultra-expensive shoes actually prevents our body from feeling, sensing and properly responding to the various healthy stresses of running. Or, as researchers at the University of Oregon found, "the greater the cushioning in the shoe, the greater the impact shock on the leg."
Ironically, this highly counterintuitive discovery was made in Eugene, Oregon--barely a hundred or so miles from Nike's world headquarters in Beaverton. Huh.
Somehow, our consumer civilization transformed running--a quintessentially basic human act--into an expensive pastime, with luxury-branded shoes, unpronounceable injuries... and $300+ marathon entry fees.
It's also instructive to observe the shoe industry's response. After all, no one makes money not selling shoes, so Nike and other high end sneaker brands had to at least try to figure out a way to "brand" the barefoot running experience too.
And so, for only about a hundred bucks or so, we can buy a pair of Nike "Barefoot-Like" sneakers. They're for sale on Nike's website, right next to all those expensive heavily-padded shoes we were supposed to buy before.
Readers, tell me, how are expensive branded sneakers any different from any other zombie-based advertising/consumption cycle? And if it bugs you to pay 30% more for, say, a name-brand can of tuna when it furtively emerges out of the same third-party factory as lower-priced unbranded tuna, shouldn't it bug you enormously to pay 700% more for sneakers? Especially when all those sneaker features they use to justify their high price at best make no difference, and at worst might actually hurt us?
A final note: Speaking as a three-time marathoner and multi-time half-marathoner who's logged thousand and thousands of running miles, most running injuries are form- or technique-based. This goes double for casual runners. In other words, fix your running form, improve your technique, and you'll run injury-free in whatever pair of reasonably priced sneakers you're happy with. For readers interested in an excellent resource on how to improve running technique, I strongly recommend Danny Dreyer's book Chi Running.
Resources:
1) A short video of a fateful day when the NY Times did a piece on barefoot running. Hipsters raged, then bravely began the search for the next new thing. Note also the mention of the University of Oregon's biomechanical research study at 2:21 in the video.
2) More on how to run barefoot.
3) Why is too much protection a bad thing? For more on this topic, see Nicholas Taleb's discussion of the concepts of hormesis and mithridization in his book Antifragile.
READ NEXT: The Unintended Irony of Pabst Beer
AND: When U Know The Cost, U Know the Margins
Forget those cheap shoes. These $175 running shoes are far better. Mass produced, yet designed to fit your feet. And they're built for comfort, with extra padding to absorb all those shocks to your body."
Readers, this is the basic marketing message behind high-end sneaker brands. For many, it's highly persuasive. After all, how dumb would it be to take a chance on some no-name pair of sneakers... and maybe hurt yourself. Right?
But then, something odd happened.
Some ten or so years ago, "barefoot running" became all the rage. And it raised questions the sneaker industry didn't want you asking. For example, a thoughtful if sarcastic sneaker buyer might ask, "Now hold on a minute: First I had to buy overpriced cushiony sneakers to protect myself from injury. And now you're telling me I don't even need shoes?"
But it gets worse: it turns out that many if not most running injuries result from protecting ourselves too much. All that padding in all those ultra-expensive shoes actually prevents our body from feeling, sensing and properly responding to the various healthy stresses of running. Or, as researchers at the University of Oregon found, "the greater the cushioning in the shoe, the greater the impact shock on the leg."
Ironically, this highly counterintuitive discovery was made in Eugene, Oregon--barely a hundred or so miles from Nike's world headquarters in Beaverton. Huh.
Somehow, our consumer civilization transformed running--a quintessentially basic human act--into an expensive pastime, with luxury-branded shoes, unpronounceable injuries... and $300+ marathon entry fees.
It's also instructive to observe the shoe industry's response. After all, no one makes money not selling shoes, so Nike and other high end sneaker brands had to at least try to figure out a way to "brand" the barefoot running experience too.
And so, for only about a hundred bucks or so, we can buy a pair of Nike "Barefoot-Like" sneakers. They're for sale on Nike's website, right next to all those expensive heavily-padded shoes we were supposed to buy before.
Readers, tell me, how are expensive branded sneakers any different from any other zombie-based advertising/consumption cycle? And if it bugs you to pay 30% more for, say, a name-brand can of tuna when it furtively emerges out of the same third-party factory as lower-priced unbranded tuna, shouldn't it bug you enormously to pay 700% more for sneakers? Especially when all those sneaker features they use to justify their high price at best make no difference, and at worst might actually hurt us?
A final note: Speaking as a three-time marathoner and multi-time half-marathoner who's logged thousand and thousands of running miles, most running injuries are form- or technique-based. This goes double for casual runners. In other words, fix your running form, improve your technique, and you'll run injury-free in whatever pair of reasonably priced sneakers you're happy with. For readers interested in an excellent resource on how to improve running technique, I strongly recommend Danny Dreyer's book Chi Running.
Resources:
1) A short video of a fateful day when the NY Times did a piece on barefoot running. Hipsters raged, then bravely began the search for the next new thing. Note also the mention of the University of Oregon's biomechanical research study at 2:21 in the video.
2) More on how to run barefoot.
3) Why is too much protection a bad thing? For more on this topic, see Nicholas Taleb's discussion of the concepts of hormesis and mithridization in his book Antifragile.
READ NEXT: The Unintended Irony of Pabst Beer
AND: When U Know The Cost, U Know the Margins
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
Carrot and Tarragon Soup (Yet Another "Laughably Cheap" Recipe!)
You could easily pay $9.00 for an appetizer-size serving of this delicious soup in some trendy Manhattan restaurant. It would probably arrive in one of those annoying one-inch deep bowls.
But we're going to make this soup at home, serve it in a normal bowl, and we're going to do it for around three bucks for the entire pot. Which means this soup runs about 45-50c a serving, making it a front-runner for one of our most laughably cheap recipes here at Casual Kitchen.
People who say healthy food has to cost a lot simply have no clue.
I hope you enjoy this recipe as much as we did!
******************************
Carrot and Tarragon Soup
Heavily adapted and simplified from Laurel's Kitchen
Ingredients:
6-7 carrots, peeled, cut into large 2-3” chunks
2-3 potatoes, peeled, cut into large 2-3” chunks
Water to cover
2-3 Tablespoons butter (or olive oil or canola oil)
2 onions, coarsely chopped
1 generous teaspoon dried tarragon
2 cups milk
2-3 cups water
1/2 cup white table wine
1/4 teaspoon black pepper and optional salt to taste
Directions:
1) Peel carrots and potatoes, chop into 2-3” chunks, and cover with water in a 4 quart pot. Bring to a boil and simmer until carrots are tender/al dente, about 20 minutes.
2) While carrots and potatoes are simmering, chop onions and add to a large soup pot with butter and dried tarragon. Saute onions for 10 minutes or so on medium heat until soft. Let stand.
3) When carrots and potatoes are cooked, drain and transfer to a food processor or blender in (roughly) three batches. With each batch, add about a third of both the 2-3 cups each of the milk and water. Puree until smooth, then transfer puree to soup pot and combine with the onions/tarragon. Add any of the remaining water and milk to the soup pot, bring to a boil, and simmer for 5-7 minutes or so. Add black pepper and optional salt if desired.
Serves 6-7 as a main dish.
Two recipe notes:
1) Let's itemize the cost of this laughably cheap recipe:
Butter/oil 15c
Onions 40c
Carrots 60c
Potatoes 40c
Milk 65c
Cheap box white wine 75c
Spices 10c
Total Cost: about $3.05 or about 45-50c per serving
2) Second, thinking about a snotty Manhattan restaurant serving $9 soups in one-inch deep bowls reminds me of Aesop's fable of the fox and the stork.
3) Finally, a few related links for new readers:
a) The 25 Best Laughably Cheap Recipes at Casual Kitchen
b) MORE! Top 25 Laughably Cheap Recipes at Casual Kitchen
c) Ten Healthy Recipes for Under $1 a Serving
d) Glossary of Casual Kitchen Memes
But we're going to make this soup at home, serve it in a normal bowl, and we're going to do it for around three bucks for the entire pot. Which means this soup runs about 45-50c a serving, making it a front-runner for one of our most laughably cheap recipes here at Casual Kitchen.
People who say healthy food has to cost a lot simply have no clue.
I hope you enjoy this recipe as much as we did!
******************************
Carrot and Tarragon Soup
Heavily adapted and simplified from Laurel's Kitchen
Ingredients:
6-7 carrots, peeled, cut into large 2-3” chunks
2-3 potatoes, peeled, cut into large 2-3” chunks
Water to cover
2-3 Tablespoons butter (or olive oil or canola oil)
2 onions, coarsely chopped
1 generous teaspoon dried tarragon
2 cups milk
2-3 cups water
1/2 cup white table wine
1/4 teaspoon black pepper and optional salt to taste
Directions:
1) Peel carrots and potatoes, chop into 2-3” chunks, and cover with water in a 4 quart pot. Bring to a boil and simmer until carrots are tender/al dente, about 20 minutes.
2) While carrots and potatoes are simmering, chop onions and add to a large soup pot with butter and dried tarragon. Saute onions for 10 minutes or so on medium heat until soft. Let stand.
3) When carrots and potatoes are cooked, drain and transfer to a food processor or blender in (roughly) three batches. With each batch, add about a third of both the 2-3 cups each of the milk and water. Puree until smooth, then transfer puree to soup pot and combine with the onions/tarragon. Add any of the remaining water and milk to the soup pot, bring to a boil, and simmer for 5-7 minutes or so. Add black pepper and optional salt if desired.
Serves 6-7 as a main dish.
Two recipe notes:
1) Let's itemize the cost of this laughably cheap recipe:
Butter/oil 15c
Onions 40c
Carrots 60c
Potatoes 40c
Milk 65c
Cheap box white wine 75c
Spices 10c
Total Cost: about $3.05 or about 45-50c per serving
2) Second, thinking about a snotty Manhattan restaurant serving $9 soups in one-inch deep bowls reminds me of Aesop's fable of the fox and the stork.
3) Finally, a few related links for new readers:
a) The 25 Best Laughably Cheap Recipes at Casual Kitchen
b) MORE! Top 25 Laughably Cheap Recipes at Casual Kitchen
c) Ten Healthy Recipes for Under $1 a Serving
d) Glossary of Casual Kitchen Memes
