I suppose it depends on how you classify “being awesome”, but there are some hobbies that select for moderately smart, educated and adventurous people. You would, of course, have to take up that hobby, but if it’s something you’d independently like to do, it’s win-win.
Generally, activities that are prohibitively difficult, functionally pointless, demonstrate an excess of leisure time, and confer in-group social status for those who are especially competent. Concretely, dancing, circus skills and rock climbing seem to draw a suspiciously nerdy and educated crowd.
I think this is analogous to socially-acceptable conspicuous consumption. If you want to demonstrate / obtain desirable characteristics without appearing narcissistic and shallow, develop a virtuous-looking hobby that fosters those characteristics.
How about having a hobby of doing something useful, but unpaid?
For example, I found people doing nature-protecting activities to be a nice company. Specifically, there is a place in Slovakia with some unique flowers, which require some work to do so they survive. Originally the flowers adapted to side-effects of some agricultural activities, but those are not longer done; so the volunteers simulate the activities. It is a work that can be done by dozen people in two or three days, so if we make it a week, we have a time reserve for case of rain, and we have some free time to talk.
To me this seemed like a great filter—it filtered for having free time, willingness to do a volunteer activity, willingness to go away from the computer… and also the people who started this were great, and then it attracted similar people.
I am aware that from sufficiently abstract point of view it demonstrates having time and money (so we can do volunteer work instead of working to survive). But it still seems that signalling by doing something useful attracts different kind of people than e.g. signalling by buying expensive consumer goods.
Protecting nature was just a specific example; perhaps a good one because it requires no special skills. But any kind of volunteer work could have a similar effect.
What? Rock climbing demonstrates depth? Circus skills are virtuous?
Which hobbies are especially shallow and narcissistic? Arts, crafts, gardening, cooking? Team sport, extreme sport, cycling, karate, yoga? Romance novels, short films, video games? Genealogy, collecting, puzzle solving? Card games, brewing, stage magic, lock picking? Sailing, camping, fishing, geocaching, trainspotting?
You are right that a cluster exists, and not everyone will be a con-langing, rocket building, capoeira fighter, but the attributes you’re naming don’t select for that group (or any group really).
Perhaps “virtuous” and “shallow” aren’t the ideal words to use, but they seemed to be pointing well-enough to the concept I was trying to get at.
Let’s say Albert has a ridiculously well-defined physique. Can you recognise that him saying “I do a lot of rock climbing” appears less narcissistic and shallow than “I spend hours and hours toning up at the gym”?
OK. I think I’ve figured out the miscommunication here. My claim isn’t that these activities select for people who exhibit virtue and depth, but for people smart enough at signalling to pursue “vain” outcomes incidentally through indirect means, and wealthy enough to waste a lot of time doing it.
As a personal example, I am currently learning authentic jazz dancing. On one level this is because I find it intrinsically enjoyable, but on another level I’m less proud of, it’s because many women in my social circle exhibit intense arousal when they see a guy in a sharp suit bust out a sweet Charleston solo.
There are more direct and less time-consuming ways of accomplishing this, but I don’t much care for them. On one level, I don’t much care for them because I find them dull and uninteresting, but on another level I’m less proud of, it’s because I want to signal to a more discerning audience.
I suppose it depends on how you classify “being awesome”, but there are some hobbies that select for moderately smart, educated and adventurous people. You would, of course, have to take up that hobby, but if it’s something you’d independently like to do, it’s win-win.
Such as?
Generally, activities that are prohibitively difficult, functionally pointless, demonstrate an excess of leisure time, and confer in-group social status for those who are especially competent. Concretely, dancing, circus skills and rock climbing seem to draw a suspiciously nerdy and educated crowd.
Upvoted for being the first (and so far only) person to Name Three.
Seconding all of these, oddly enough.
I think this is analogous to socially-acceptable conspicuous consumption. If you want to demonstrate / obtain desirable characteristics without appearing narcissistic and shallow, develop a virtuous-looking hobby that fosters those characteristics.
How about having a hobby of doing something useful, but unpaid?
For example, I found people doing nature-protecting activities to be a nice company. Specifically, there is a place in Slovakia with some unique flowers, which require some work to do so they survive. Originally the flowers adapted to side-effects of some agricultural activities, but those are not longer done; so the volunteers simulate the activities. It is a work that can be done by dozen people in two or three days, so if we make it a week, we have a time reserve for case of rain, and we have some free time to talk.
To me this seemed like a great filter—it filtered for having free time, willingness to do a volunteer activity, willingness to go away from the computer… and also the people who started this were great, and then it attracted similar people.
I am aware that from sufficiently abstract point of view it demonstrates having time and money (so we can do volunteer work instead of working to survive). But it still seems that signalling by doing something useful attracts different kind of people than e.g. signalling by buying expensive consumer goods.
Protecting nature was just a specific example; perhaps a good one because it requires no special skills. But any kind of volunteer work could have a similar effect.
What? Rock climbing demonstrates depth? Circus skills are virtuous?
Which hobbies are especially shallow and narcissistic? Arts, crafts, gardening, cooking? Team sport, extreme sport, cycling, karate, yoga? Romance novels, short films, video games? Genealogy, collecting, puzzle solving? Card games, brewing, stage magic, lock picking? Sailing, camping, fishing, geocaching, trainspotting?
You are right that a cluster exists, and not everyone will be a con-langing, rocket building, capoeira fighter, but the attributes you’re naming don’t select for that group (or any group really).
Perhaps “virtuous” and “shallow” aren’t the ideal words to use, but they seemed to be pointing well-enough to the concept I was trying to get at.
Let’s say Albert has a ridiculously well-defined physique. Can you recognise that him saying “I do a lot of rock climbing” appears less narcissistic and shallow than “I spend hours and hours toning up at the gym”?
OK. I think I’ve figured out the miscommunication here. My claim isn’t that these activities select for people who exhibit virtue and depth, but for people smart enough at signalling to pursue “vain” outcomes incidentally through indirect means, and wealthy enough to waste a lot of time doing it.
As a personal example, I am currently learning authentic jazz dancing. On one level this is because I find it intrinsically enjoyable, but on another level I’m less proud of, it’s because many women in my social circle exhibit intense arousal when they see a guy in a sharp suit bust out a sweet Charleston solo.
There are more direct and less time-consuming ways of accomplishing this, but I don’t much care for them. On one level, I don’t much care for them because I find them dull and uninteresting, but on another level I’m less proud of, it’s because I want to signal to a more discerning audience.