Quote: (12-15-2013 03:37 PM)Beyond Borders Wrote:
Great post as usual, Vincent.
Thanks bro! :-)
Quote:Quote:
I find the ideas you mentioned, especially the observations in the portion of your post you wrote, well worth thinking about at length. Some of this has crossed my own mind lately and I experiment with some meditation myself. I'd like to look into some Eastern philosophies a bit more.
But that said, and forgive me for going off on a bit of a tangent here (none of this is directed at you)...
Part of this Osho quote really irks a pet peeve of mine and I felt a need to call it out. This is something I see so many popular experts doing with arguments they don't agree with. Instead of taking a book on its own terms and disagreeing with what it actually says, they disagree with the simplified stereotype of the idea and expect that to pass muster.
You see this so often with books that go against the grain.
"The four hour work week is dumb because you can't work four hours a week and get rich."
"Think and Grow Rich is foolish because you can't just think positive and expect that to make you rich."
This is the type of shit people throw out there when slamming these books, but it's far too simplistic because neither of these books make these assertions and in fact both make it a point to make that clear within. Essentially, the naysayers are disagreeing with some trumped up kid's version of the actual content, and I honestly think it's insulting to both the intelligence of the authors and the readers of these books.
Because people would hardly rant and rave about these books if that's what they really said - most people who rant about them are actually pretty intelligent, accomplished people.
One thing I always keep in mind when examining ideas I don't agree with is that if there's a seemingly easy argument to an important idea, something that jumps right to mind instinctually when I first come across it, chances are that countless people have raised it already and in fact the point has likely been addressed directly as the idea was presented in the first place.
So if I really fancy myself one of the select few who was able to see right through it on first look, it's probably just that I'm giving myself too much credit and the idea too little.
That's why when someone just throws something out there loosely like Osho does here - i.e. "everyone knows it's foolish to presume you can just think and get rich" - it tells me they either never actually evaluated the idea they're trying to shame (maybe just heard the title) or are just too lazy to attack the idea with reason on its own merits. Or they simply knew they could get away with playing on the ignorance of the masses...
And when I see someone commit that type of logical foul I find it really hard to take them seriously or trust them to keep intellectual integrity in mind when presenting their own ideas. I also find it ironic when he describes Napoleon Hill's ideas as dangerous when his own style of shooting it down is so intellectually dangerous itself.
Think and Grow Rich is about WAY more than positive thinking, and I urge everyone to give it a read and decide for themselves what it is he's really getting at. Just wanted to throw that out there before anyone jumped to the conclusion that the excerpt quoted is actually making some kind of case against it.
EDIT: As a side note, I don't know anything about Osho and am not even opposing what he says here or anywhere based on this fallacy he's committed. Chances are he's probably just going by what others told him about the book. I will probably look into his writing further.
I just take issue with him so casually hating on a book he clearly isn't giving fair treatment too.
I hear exactly what you're saying BB, and I completely agree.
I think you're trying to say (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that you should take things as they are and give them the merit they deserve rather than discrediting them on the basis of a generalization.
e.g. - The 4 Hour Work Week is possible, but you need to work your ass off first in order to get to that point. Doesn't mean it's bullshit or that the concepts in the book like geoarbitrage, outsourcing, 80/20 are somehow illegitimate!
Even though the Easterns believe that you aren't in control of the contents of your mind, I definitely feel that surrounding yourself with the kinds of influences you want (i.e. the people in your life, where you live, your hobbies, the books you read) has a big positive impact on life.
In fact, all the more so, since if you aren't in control of the contents of your mind, you should tightly control what you allow into it and who you allow to influence it.
The Osho quote is a bit polar, I agree. I think the main thing is to find what works for you individually and discard what doesn't, Bruce Lee style. As long as it gets the practical result you're looking for, I don't care how you skin your cats.