Yes, but it can be either a bad sign about what you’re trying to talk yourself into, or about your state of mind. It simply means that your previous position was held strongly—not because of strong rational evidence alone, because stronger evidence can override that—the act of assimilating the information precludes talking yourself into it. If you have to talk yourself into something, it probably means that there is an irrational aspect to your attachment to the alternative.
And that irrational, often emotional attachment can be either right or wrong; were this not true, gut feeling would answer every question truthfully, and the first plausible explanation one could think of would always be correct.
I interpreted the quote as saying that if you are not readily enthusiastic about something but have to beat yourself into doing it, then it is a sign that you should not direct (any more) resources to it.
As did I, but I disagreed with the point that enthusiasm is a necessary indicator of a good idea. Consider the act of eating one’s vegetables (assuming that one is a small, stereotypical child) - intuitively repulsive, but ultimately beneficial, the sort of thing which one might have to talk oneself into.
Y’know, there are all sorts of counterexamples to this … but I think its still a bad sign, if not a definitive one, on the basis that if I had been more suspicious of things I was talking myself into I would have had a definite net benefit to my life. (Not counting times I was neurohacking myself, admittedly, but that’s not really the same.)
Paul Graham
Yes, but it can be either a bad sign about what you’re trying to talk yourself into, or about your state of mind. It simply means that your previous position was held strongly—not because of strong rational evidence alone, because stronger evidence can override that—the act of assimilating the information precludes talking yourself into it. If you have to talk yourself into something, it probably means that there is an irrational aspect to your attachment to the alternative.
And that irrational, often emotional attachment can be either right or wrong; were this not true, gut feeling would answer every question truthfully, and the first plausible explanation one could think of would always be correct.
I interpreted the quote as saying that if you are not readily enthusiastic about something but have to beat yourself into doing it, then it is a sign that you should not direct (any more) resources to it.
As did I, but I disagreed with the point that enthusiasm is a necessary indicator of a good idea. Consider the act of eating one’s vegetables (assuming that one is a small, stereotypical child) - intuitively repulsive, but ultimately beneficial, the sort of thing which one might have to talk oneself into.
Y’know, there are all sorts of counterexamples to this … but I think its still a bad sign, if not a definitive one, on the basis that if I had been more suspicious of things I was talking myself into I would have had a definite net benefit to my life. (Not counting times I was neurohacking myself, admittedly, but that’s not really the same.)
Yes, there’s an unfortunate tendency among some “rationalist” types to dismiss heuristics because they don’t apply in every situation.
I’ve had to talk myself into going on some crazy roller-coasters. After the experience though, I’m extremely glad that I did.