YIDIRYIDIR

deep throating regularly. (not speaking from experience)

The smartest people often aren't the ones who read the most books. They're the ones that have the right attitude to knowledge. Curiosity, intellectual honesty and Action-driven learning beat Accumulation by a miles. People with right attitude are researchers, always having a reason for their learning, wither they're curious about something, or want to figure out something, or have a goal in general. They do all that with intellectual honesty, as in ego-free, ideology-free, radical open-mindedness and integrity. and learning happens in cycles of intense learning, reflection, action, integration, synthesis.... The "read books daily" is lame linear productivity advice. _________ Edit: lemme add detail and nuance. what i mean is, if your goal is to learn, discover, understand, theorize, and all sorts of intellectual stuff, establishing a daily habit of reading goes against human nature. we as humans learn information that we either use, are curious about or matter to us in the moment. memorization is not effective. I'm not saying reading books is bad, I'm saying reading books with the wrong attitude is ineffective. if you have the right attitude, you won't find a problem with reading books and consuming any information. because you would be curious and look for answers. Reading books daily seems mechanical, you would only implement this habit if you either hate learning and you're not an intellectual person, or you have an extremely tight schedule. if you are a curious person, you would go from phases of consuming an equivalent of 3-4 hours of reading books, and times when you're barely consuming any because you're on a different phase, you have clarity now, there's too much action to take. these phases could be from 2 weeks each to 6 months each to more. the point is, we don't learn in a linear manner.

Damn. So you’re saying all this time I wasn’t joking… I was practicing wisdom? always knew i was special, I might start writing books.

it's a paradox. don't mistake that with Chaos and randomness. i don't know how to explain it but you have to be in that state of mind to grasp it.

My Why is that there is no why. My purpose is no purpose. My life is meaningful because life has no meaning. took me some time to grasp that, and once i did, it set me free.

the whole social media business niches.

i need help with some insights on this topic. i believe "the more smart and aware the more depressed" is true until a certain point. and that certain point is what I'm trying to articulate. here are my guesses so far: the early version of smart is deconstructing everything, every illusion, every meaning system. that leads to suffering, but that suffering ends or gets better once you start conscious construction the more smart and aware you are, the more you move from Orange stage to Green stage, and the moment you jump to tier 2 in spiral dynamics, the construction journey starts before, everything was external to you, value system, motivation, meaning. awareness strips you of all that, you end up thinking "nothing is real, nothing matters, so what's the point?" thus leading to depression. you get over that once you develop internal systems of motivation, meaning and values what are your takes?

There is a billion dollars start up idea here lol seriously though, the more you stay inside, the more it pulls you in, the less your desire to touch grass gets. what you're feeling now isn't real, as soon as you dress well and get outside, you realize it's not as bad as you felt.

Here's what's happening in this post: First, my framing was off, my bad. When I said “reading daily is lame,” what I meant was that that's usually passive, linear consumption without application that often becomes intellectual comfort, not real learning. But that’s not how it landed. It landed like I was saying reading is useless, that people are wasting their time, or pretending to be smart. Of course that triggered people. That part is on me. But here’s what actually made me pause. Most people didn’t engage with the idea. They attacked me personally, said I don’t have authority, "i don't know shit" and "it's your thing only" while dismissing the argument without addressing it, and created a strawman like “he thinks reading is bad. and he doesn't read at all” That’s not debate, that’s defense. And I’m going to say it directly: some of you acted exactly like when religious people get their religion criticized. When a belief is deeply embedded, people don’t hear nuance. They hear “your worldview is getting attacked” Then emotion replaces reasoning, identity replaces curiosity, and defense replaces inquiry. And that made me realize something deeper: for many people, reading books is no longer just a tool, it’s part of their identity. It represents intelligence, discipline, and differentiation from non-readers. So when that gets questioned, it feels personal. my bad for poking that. Let me clarify my actual position. Reading books is not the goal. Reading books is a tool. I read books, a lot of them, but not linearly, and not "from page 1 to last page without skipping anything" approach. When you tell me, “read books daily,” it’s like telling a painter: “mix paint every day, even if you’re not creating any painting, just keep mixing paint and leave it there. You’re an artist after all, it’s what you do.” That sounds ridiculous, but that’s exactly what passive reading looks like when it’s disconnected from purpose, curiosity, and application. also. reading for enjoyment or inspiration is a different thing, I'm not talking about that. Real learning is messy. It’s nonlinear. It’s driven by genuine curiosity. It’s reinforced through action, feedback, mistakes, and reflection. You can read for hours every day and still not think clearly, not apply anything, and not grow in any meaningful way. So yeah, I’ll own my mistake: I framed it in a way that triggered ego instead of inviting thought. But at the same time, the reaction proved something too. When a habit becomes unquestioned and tied to identity, people will defend it the same way they defend beliefs. If there’s anything worth taking from this, it’s not that “reading is bad.” It’s this: don’t confuse consuming information with actually learning. And maybe more importantly, notice what you feel the need to defend, because that’s usually where you’ve stopped questioning and thinking.

I made a mistake by making a title that isn't precise and people think I mean reading books in general is ineffective.

sure, i will make better delivery next time.

at this point yes lol

@NewKidOnTheBlock we need to distinguish between learning as an adult and foundational education. i agree, primary school and a bit above is necessary and requires that attitude of daily learning and descipline. because at that point, you know nothing. you are talking about discovery. curiosity will take you further than just reading daily and hoping you stumble upon something. Curiosity doesn't just lead you to practical stuff, it leads you to all sorts of knowledge. if one has the attitude I'm talking about, you wouldn't need a daily habit of reading, you would already be doing that and constantly searching for answers, searching for clarity. and you are right, there's nothing stopping us from doing both, I'm just saying that one is far superior than the other. Not just orange stage perspective, but also yellow. if you study systems, there's a difference between a complex system and a complicated one. a complicated System is a linear one, with predictable outcome, predictable interactions of components. an example would be just setting a system of of daily reading. it is linear, predictable, can be influenced directly and you can alter the results in a linear way. but a complex system is a system that works in a non linear way, and generates an emergent outcome that's far greater than what would be expected if you think in linear logic. it's where the saying of "a whole greater than the sum of its parts" came from.

i don't have a problem that you don't like me personally, You keep making this personal. just discuss and debate my idea, not me. you are making appeals to authority to discredit my idea, i could be a bum in the street and my idea could still be right. I get it, my idea triggers identity, my bad next time i will deliver my ideas better while taking in account people's fragile egos.

@Lila9 but you're still not understanding the point I'm making. I'm not saying "read only when you feel like it". You're making a straw man otta my ass.

i told you what i know, tell me what you know! what's going on? this forum is supposed to be for idea exchange and discussions, not for emotional debate. I'm just standing behind my idea from what i learned, not attacking anyone, not hating on any idea or anyone.

you have you opinion and i have mine. if argumentating an idea considered close mindedness, then everyone wouldn't know shit. am i supposed to say "well i might be wrong, on fact, I'm probably wrong, and won't even stand behind my idea because I'm open minded, I'm open to being wrong so i will never be sure"

No, the title is accurate and not clickbait. i said "reading books DAILY is lame" i said daily. then i explained in my post. and for that "what?" post, that's april fools, i said it in replies. If you guys just want a straw man to criticize the fuck out, just lemme know and imma make a stupid post to satisfy your needs.

what the fuck ? i didn't even see this line haha. bro you live in your own world and assumptions. understand what i said first.

@Lila9 you read the title and responded. i didn't say reading book is bad. read the post and replies

nice pattern, pretty accurate. never thought of it like that

exactly. that's what i was trying to say. no amount of external validation, attention and connection will fill that hole.

There has bever been a better time for you to master staying alone. what i mean is, figure out how to develope internal systems of meaning, validation, and identity. You can totally be happy while being alone without anyone knowing a single shit about you, without having a social circle, without anyone to relate to. the idea that isolation is bad and a sign of failure or something negative is not true at all. I've been where you are. maybe worse. i live in a conformist religious country. my whole family is religious. when i was in university, all my relationships were shallow, i couldn't find anyone to relate to intellectually. and when i do, it's only for a short period or some circumstances get in the way. i thought i was a loser and I'm the problem. But it took 1 year of staying alone, after quiting university, and dozens of actualized.org lectures and learning and experimenting to finally get that "turning inwards" figured out enough to get past my loneliness. Believe me when i tell you after that, i preferred staying alone, that fucking independence and happiness felt insane, to a point where it feels stupid to risk letting someone in lol. with enough learning, inner work, integrity, mindfulness, and constantly trying to figure out your next move in life, i promise you'll get so much better with loneliness. I've been in your situation, so if you want to ask any questions and get into details, feel free to DM me. ____________ also a mistake you might be making is having high standards when it comes to socialising. you don't have to check all boxes to be friends with someone. just enjoying their company and making sure they won't impact you negatively is enough. intellectual connection, having the same worldview, same mindset, same goals, same lifestyle and all that is a plus. also, the need to be seen and understood from the outside and prove yourself otherwise you suffer might be screwing you, thus turning inwards is necessary. you need to develop your psychology to a point where if it's only you on earth, you would be as much happy and secure when otherwise.

That's playing defence. also that won't guarantee better education, especially that you have to force yourself to read aka descipline, and forget 90% of what you read because our minds aren't designed for memorization. i might start pulling scientific studies and statistics at this point lol it's a simple thing, we learn what we use, and what matters to us in specific personal contexts. how much of that "general knowledge" that all of us memorized that you remember now? no matter how important it is? the answer would be just the facts that you either used to fulfill whatever purpose, or was curious about when you learned it, and still matters to you now*.