My problem with the word “sazen” is that I always need to google WTF it means. It somehow refuses to stick in my mind.
Now that I looked it up, it does not seem like the same idea. Duncan wrote about how you hear the advice but fail to apply it, because the advice is insufficiently clear/actionable. It’s like someone giving you a hashcode of the useful advice. The mistake is on the side of the one who gives the advice.
This article is about refusing to consider good advice for status reasons (because it is an advice for children or beginners, and I am not one of them). The mistake is on your side… and you can stop making it!
Not entirely sure where the downvotes and disagreements are from, specifically since I think the piece links neatly to the “Wisdom” part of Duncan’s “Sazen” post. If anyone wants to comment why, I’d appreciate that.
Ouch, I’m sorry that you’ve had people talk to you in that way in a non-genuine manner, so much so that you interpreted my comment as such. No, it wasn’t passive-aggressive, perhaps just an awkward attempt to share my delight that you rediscovered—by first principles—what I consider to be a really strong insight; it was not intended to dismiss your realisation. For example, if you rediscovered Newton’s laws, I would similarly be impressed; “Nice one!” I might even say. I hope you can take my word for it, in that what I wrote is a true reflection of my intent.
That brings me to my initial query, though: in what way is this separate from Sazen? In other words, what is the quality of your realisation that differs from Sazen?
I don’t think I saw a direct response to that, yet. No worries if you don’t have the time or energy; if so, just say so and I’ll try figure out your reasons by myself. It would really help if you gave me a hint, though.
Sounds like you discovered the concept of sazen (https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/k9dsbn8LZ6tTesDS3/sazen). Nice one! Give Duncan’s post a read, I think you’ll enjoy it 😊
My problem with the word “sazen” is that I always need to google WTF it means. It somehow refuses to stick in my mind.
Now that I looked it up, it does not seem like the same idea. Duncan wrote about how you hear the advice but fail to apply it, because the advice is insufficiently clear/actionable. It’s like someone giving you a hashcode of the useful advice. The mistake is on the side of the one who gives the advice.
This article is about refusing to consider good advice for status reasons (because it is an advice for children or beginners, and I am not one of them). The mistake is on your side… and you can stop making it!
Not entirely sure where the downvotes and disagreements are from, specifically since I think the piece links neatly to the “Wisdom” part of Duncan’s “Sazen” post. If anyone wants to comment why, I’d appreciate that.
For me, it comes across as passive aggressive and condescending, while misreading the post as “discovering” the concept of a Sazen, which it isn’t.
Ouch, I’m sorry that you’ve had people talk to you in that way in a non-genuine manner, so much so that you interpreted my comment as such. No, it wasn’t passive-aggressive, perhaps just an awkward attempt to share my delight that you rediscovered—by first principles—what I consider to be a really strong insight; it was not intended to dismiss your realisation. For example, if you rediscovered Newton’s laws, I would similarly be impressed; “Nice one!” I might even say. I hope you can take my word for it, in that what I wrote is a true reflection of my intent.
That brings me to my initial query, though: in what way is this separate from Sazen? In other words, what is the quality of your realisation that differs from Sazen?
I don’t think I saw a direct response to that, yet. No worries if you don’t have the time or energy; if so, just say so and I’ll try figure out your reasons by myself. It would really help if you gave me a hint, though.