Why do people who don't read or develop always find something to say?
And achieve more in life than those who read and develop?
Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Question, what should I say? How to get to the library)…, can certainly answer questions in the orbit of their daily life.For example: you have come for mushrooms, and a local resident (as you write, not reading, not developing), he will perfectly answer you about the forest and where and when you need to go to fill the basket.
But if you go with a person of this level of knowledge to the Expo exhibition (the latest technologies, there he will not be a guide for you..
The amount of knowledge and information in a person's brain determines their outlook and ability to answer many questions..And to do this, you need to develop yourself constantly and read academic, special literature and classics . Briefly everything.
It sounds like you want to ask something like: why do people who spend a lot of time studying and reading books fail to succeed, while those who don't bother do so well? I can tell you why.
Acquiring specialized knowledge, such as math or literature, will not make you successful. No amount of specialized knowledge will do this. Success comes to those who know how to apply their knowledge to achieve their goals – and this is not taught in school and university, you can be sure.
If you know a lot-great, now you are an encyclopedia. What will you do with this knowledge? How will you apply them in your life? How can they help you make your life better? Because knowledge itself does not contain instructions on how to use it to achieve success. By studying mathematics, you will not learn how to become a great mathematician in life, because it depends on you, not on mathematics.
And in fact, you don't need to know too much – you can hire a specialist in the field of knowledge who will sell you this knowledge and solve the problem. You need to be able to apply knowledge, understand strategies for achieving success, be able to navigate the world and act in such a way as to achieve what you want.
Well, if his answer is reasonable and logical, then why not listen?
Maybe he reads it, but doesn't report it to you?!? Even more so,
“Don't read” is not equal to”Don't think”. Perhaps a person learns empirically and gets knowledge “by word of mouth”, watching video lectures and useful audio podcasts=))
“I know I don't know anything,” Socrates said. Sometimes really knowledgeable people do not build something out of themselves and do not prove their knowledge to everyone around them.
With respect,
Your Love Petrosova.
The question, in my opinion, is overly generalizing. Most of them, always, achieve more … �
I'm not sure. Often – yes, I agree.
But in order to answer something and stand on your own point of view, you do not need to be educated in any way. It is enough to be confident and not timid:�lib.ru��At the same time, the sign of “development” is rather the ability to stand up for different points of view, self-criticism: the willingness to doubt and listen to the position of others (not only in order to answer better). But to state your position, and confidently, is easy; plus, since “there is no right thing”, there is some logic in any position, it is really not complete idiocy.�
Friends, if a person really achieves a lot in life – do not even doubt, as a rule, he develops, and very seriously. Just not in the way you expect (through reading, formal education). But in areas that are important to him, he sees and uses system connections, practical psychology, and so on very well – rather better than most people.
Reading and developing are not the same thing. You can read and degrade, depending on what and how to read.
To develop, it is not enough just to read.
Excess information interferes with development, like being overweight. Superfluous information is one that a person does not know how to apply. Incomplete, fragmentary, and misunderstood information creates “a lot of sadness” [Eccl.].
You don't need to read to develop. Everyone develops in their own way.
“What makes us a great nation is not what resources we possess, but how we use them” [T. D. Roosevelt]
Who develops, that and achieves.
Hello, Dmitry! Your question is extremely difficult to formulate. In this form, it is (in my opinion) almost impossible to answer it. Additional questions arise:
“people who don't read” – don't read what: romance novels, Soviet newspapers, Chekhov, business literature, or the results of space research?
“people who do not develop” – what is it: physically, professionally, in piano playing techniques, spiritually, or in the field of encyclopedic knowledge?
“always find something to answer” – what to answer, to whom, in what situation, on what topic?
“and they achieve more in life” – what exactly, in what area, by what criteria to measure, with whom to compare?
“than those who read and develop” – all the same questions here….
In addition, there are absolutes and categoricality in your question.
I am sure that if you formulate the question more concretely and clearly, you will get thoughtful and useful answers from experts.
Good luck to you!
Because it's just an appearance that they don't read.
For example, a person might not read “War and Peace” and “Crime and Punishment” (at this point, others label him “uneducated/does not read books”), but at the same time he constantly reads professional literature or some popular science articles on topics that interest him.
Well, with “development” in general, a separate question – what does “do not develop”mean? And in the process of “achieving something in life” , what happens if not development?
You know, recently a journalist wrote an article where she compared our Russian figure skater Anna Shcherbakova (at the age of 17, this girl is a world champion, she is a good student, she has a developed speech, an advertising contract with Nike, and much more) with the European figure skater Alexia Paganini (she is 22 years old, no special success).
The journalist wrote that Alexia “constantly develops”, is engaged in dancing, works on herself, and our Anya “does not develop”, because she spends all her time on figure skating and school. Well, really, a person is a world champion, what kind of development is there, continuous degradation.
Not always and not all.
I apologize for the profanity, just the special terms “logorrhea ” and” reasonableness ” are not known to everyone. Obsolete terms that are no longer used are included in quotation marks, but they are suitable for clarity. The fact that without quotation marks – not terms, but “colloquial speech”.
Why are they “plugged in every barrel”?
The reasons are different, for example:
And so on.
Do they succeed? Only when they don't go too far. For example, it is easier for a hysterical woman to give in than to explain. Paranoid better give it all and run without looking back. The schizoid will put you in a trance with his boring stuff, and you will give him your voice and soul in a half-dream.
That is, those who are still minimally productive (useful) and acceptably toxic succeed. It puts pressure on feelings of guilt, fear, insecurity, and self-importance, but IT DOESN'T CRUSH them.
As soon as the toxicity exceeds the usefulness, such a person becomes unsuccessful, he is expelled from social groups.
Thousands of blogs, magazines, channels, bloggers, journalists, social workers, writers. Many of them have a broad outlook and answer a variety of questions.
In other words, there are a huge number of successful people who read and develop.
Some are simply erudite, have accumulated a lot of data, do not understand anything, but they tell it cheerfully. They also pass off other people's thoughts as their own. Some of the ” feeders “(transmitters, repeaters) manage to become successful if they have guessed the audience for ventriloquism.
From the point of view of usefulness, it does not matter from whose mouth to hear about the achievements of science and technology – from the mouth of a talker or an expert. An expert is also an expert, because he is not busy talking, but doing. They can earn less than a chatterbox because they are interested in discovery, not recognition. Can a person who has made a discovery be considered less successful than someone who has received recognition from a wide audience?
There are many technologies, routes, and development practices:
Some of those who don't read know more of the answers. They even know more questions than the reading audience.
Some people succeed by not giving any answers or asking any questions at all, but simply showing them by doing things.
The list goes on. The word “always” is best used carefully. Super-wide generalizations can point to anything. For example, on the “unrecognized genius” who “did nothing worthwhile, but has an opinion.” In the Soviet Union, it was postulated that one should be an intellectual and read books. But they still lied about a lot of things, for example, that you should voluntarily be enslaved by party functionaries.
To begin with, I would like to get acquainted with the statistics on the basis of which such an unapproachable question is asked.
From my personal experience, people who read little and are limited in their interests never answer questions in an interesting and useful way for questioners. They have a poor vocabulary, a small vocabulary and, as it seems to me, they achieve little in life)))
Apparently, we have different ways of evaluating or socializing.
Stupid and frankly stupid people do sometimes achieve more. The question is, why don't fools do better, say, in developing philosophical concepts or proving mathematical theories? Now I will restate the same question and the answer will become obvious. Why don't smart people excel at what fools do? A little more and we will see the essence, we just need to give an example. Fools, for example, say: “Philosophy is abstruse writing for mentally disabled/insecure people. Philosophy is of no use.” To the question: “Do you consider yourself smarter than, say, Hegel, Kant, Descartes, etc.?” the answer will naturally follow that a fool does not consider himself smarter than the greatest philosophers. In this case, another question is asked: “If Descartes, Kant and Hegel are smarter than you, and you yourself confirm this, then why do you think these greatest minds did not realize that philosophy is useless writing?”. And at this point, we get the answer to the original question by delving a little deeper into neurophysiology.:
Smart people don't engage in monkey games to take the dominant position in a pack of Homo Sapiens monkeys. Intellectual development leads to a predominant number of impulses from the cerebral cortex to the subcortex compared to impulses from the subcortex to the cortex. The developed cortex slows down reptilian instincts and allows a person to become a person. The hierarchical game of establishing a dominant position over other people does not interest an intellectually developed person. Moreover, the hierarchical game has long gone beyond the limits of adequacy, because the desire to occupy a dominant position has degenerated into the desire to possess the signs of a dominant position (iPhones, Mercedes, holidays in expensive resorts). But for these “signs of dominance”, as a rule, people who have “achieved more” have to pay and work three times harder than the average person, while being burdened with loans from all sides and not having free time to think. Expensive property requires a significant amount of time to understand it first, then choose, and then you need to monitor it, take care of it, and worry about it.
An intellectually developed person has a concrete idea that life is finite, and it seems to him absolutely stupid to spend his life caring about the things that the “dominant” wants to surround himself with. You can't take anything to the grave anyway. And on the threshold of death, the only thing that will help you leave with dignity and not fall into despondency is a developed mindset. No iPhone that you owned in 20 years, will not be a reason for you in old age to believe that you have lived your life for a reason. However, a person in old age will never regret a single minute of time spent reading books.
The readers are people of the theoretical cultural “cabinet” type.
NON-readers are people of the practical offensive-militant type.
Social Ladder –
these are the places “under the sun”, for which there is a battle with uncultured methods…. A huge number of concrete examples…
There is a well-known saying “Never say never”.
Just as true is the one that says that” always ” is also not worth saying.
Well, what does your “always” mean?
It only means that you have filtered out the information in such a way that you have ignored all cases that do not correspond to your statement, and paid attention only to those that correspond to it.
This mental operation is called GENERALIZATION.
Generalization cannot be true in any case, because if you search, you can find something that is not included in your experience, but contradicts your statement.
Are all people who read little always ready to give an answer and do not get lost in any life situations?
Yes, of course, this is not so!
Just start counting only those who have fallen out of your area of focus and you will convince yourself otherwise.
All our beliefs are based on what we allow ourselves to notice.
My opinion is this. First of all, it is not necessary to generalize. Not everyone who does not develop can clearly answer the question. And if you mean the ability to parry at the level of rudeness, then this is another story. Secondly, modern approaches to development are slightly different from what they were before. Today, more and more people are talking not about IQ, but about emotional intelligence. That is, it is far from a fact that the “Krasnodar graduate student” will become successful and happy in life. But a person with a developed emotional intelligence can intuitively find the right solution, the right life answer, and negotiate with other people. And here I am just thinking, answering the question, not calling to accept only it.
These answers often resemble “trolling”, they undermine the very foundations of the question. A good example of such imaginary dexterity is shown in the story “Cut” by V. M. Shukshin.
They see the world in a simplified way, without understanding its complexity. With the development of intelligence, the worldview, perception of reality becomes more complicated. A person begins to see more problems that they didn't pay attention to before.
I think that the question lacks the most important thing – WHAT more do people achieve?
If we are talking about material values, money, real estate or position at work, then all these parameters relate to energy. Then what does reading have to do with it?
Reading is information, brain work. In information, those who just read and develop achieve more. Therefore, the observation in this case will be incorrect, since the one who does not read cannot know more than the one who reads.
“Why do they find something to say?”
It's very simple. For intellectually undeveloped people, all possible questions are divided conditionally into blocks. And each” block ” has its own answer attached, more or less suitable. You will probably notice the similarity of the answer (or even complete identity) if you try to ask such a person questions from the same “block” (attitude to the state, pension, school, shop assistants, etc.).
His answers will not differ, because he does not think, he just takes out his accumulated “record” and inserts it into the desired block.
There is a correlation: the more a person reads, i.e. devotes time to information, the less time he has to extract energy (work, sports, sex, etc.). And vice versa.
So if you want more money, read less and do more. The secret is very simple )))
Good afternoon. There is a cognitive error in your question – over-generalization, when we draw a global conclusion about the whole phenomenon based on one or several events. Therefore, it will be difficult to answer your question unequivocally. There are probably isolated cases of this, but I would not recommend generalizing. People with different backgrounds and knowledge can be successful, just like the other way around.
But there is a phenomenon that may partially answer your question. This is the Dunning-Kruger effect. People with low qualifications often have overestimated opinions about their abilities, while really qualified specialists, on the contrary, tend to underestimate their abilities and suffer from self-doubt, considering others more competent.
Due to this, the former share more about their success and abilities and are more visible to others, which affects the perception of them as more successful (with all the consequences, for example, a promotion).
Dear Dmitry,
You seem to think that people who read develop, right?
That is, in the pre-book era, people did not develop?
How many types of reading do you know?
Can you read?
Have you read S. Povarnin's book ” How to Read Books?”
According to my observations, you can read and not develop, just filling your memory with information.
And you can not read regularly, but develop in your business.
More about development.
Do you know what development is?
Does it distinguish development from growth (the amount of knowledge)?
It took me several years to clear up these issues.
Development is a purposeful, natural and irreversible change.
Therefore, if a person reads, but does not have a goal, he does not develop!
If he reads without a system, without understanding the laws of working with information , he does not develop!
And vice versa: a person who has a goal, develops without filling his memory with read information, will always find something to answer the book.
There is an interesting psychological phenomenon on this topic – the Dunning-Kruger effect. In short, the essence of it is that people who have a low level of qualification make erroneous conclusions, make unsuccessful decisions, and at the same time, due to their low level of qualification, are unable to realize these very mistakes.
Conversely, people with high qualifications tend to underestimate their abilities and suffer from a lack of confidence in their abilities, considering others more competent.
In other words, a kind of “woe from wit”.
Where did you meet such people? Rather, it's the opposite, they shrug their shoulders, answer any question, do not know anything, do not remember. At best, they will respond with a template response.
Because it's not enough just to read and develop. We need to act, make decisions, and solve urgent problems. This is what helps you achieve success, and not just read books.
Often, the ability to solve life's problems is much more important than reading and self-development (especially if it is self-development for the sake of self-development).
In fact, people who are successful and find something to respond to read, but in a different way – something is concisely, something is learned in the retelling of friends or digests, and something is serious, but at the same time selective. They just have a common infrastructure that works for them. For example, some ideas from books are retold by a consultant, they read something on the plane and during business trips, and they know something from reviews and criticism.
Because you can read and develop as much as you want, but in life to achieve success, it is more important to take and do.
Try, make mistakes, and try again.
Theory in life will never replace practice.
Maybe because they get real experience and make sense of it, unlike someone who mediated interaction with life with other people's books, and even those that he himself likes best, that is, minimally straining his mind just?
The question is very general and in some cases the statement hidden in it is wrong. If a person reads on the case, and accepts the transmitted facts regardless of whether they like them or not, then he can achieve more than collecting all the bumps from his own experience.
But it can also be as stated above.
I call it Nevzorov's syndrome. That is, the majority of those who have achieved something often adapt their intellectual abilities to the needs of the masses. Nevzorov is well read, but he has made the war on literature a cult. Well, what is “achieved”? Take your so-called President, for example. In his old age, this dude doesn't even have a woman. And he communicates with his daughters on Skype. He is shaking for his life as if 90% of the country is against him, and not vice versa. I got doubles. Failed in all its global plans. And what he stole – well, as black caviar in pancakes can not replace the lack of self-esteem and happiness. That is, not all those who are in positions and with money have achieved something.
If a person's success depended on reading, then the world would be ruled by librarians and proofreaders.
Books, of course, develop the mind, expand horizons, enrich knowledge. But this is not enough even for the game ” What?Where?When?” – there you need to be able to synthesize knowledge, build logical chains. In addition to knowledge, to be successful in your professional and private life, you need to have many other skills: communication skills, the ability to “read” people and negotiate with them, subordinate them to yourself, or get what you need from them. You need to be proactive, purposeful, or at least able to work. Leadership qualities, the ability to make decisions in the face of a catastrophic lack of information, and the willingness to take responsibility for the decisions made, and to keep the impact, are extremely important for the manager. In most human activities, what matters is not the potential, but the outcome. Therefore, active people succeed. While many booksellers simply live in the virtual world, where they are quite comfortable.
People who don't develop, don't read, and don't really know how to think. Therefore, there is no delay in thinking activity between the stages “information came to the head” and “information came out of the head”. Yes, such people always find something to say. Another thing is that, as a rule, this is not an answer, it does not apply to the situation of the case and usually does not go deeper than banal sayings and commonplaces.
As for “achieve”, what is meant by this? People achieve exactly the position that capitalism has “programmed” them to achieve. If, for example, the head of a company is considered successful and at the same time the success of the company is determined by certain economic factors (they often do not depend on either the head or the company), then the output is: this is a mediocre, very successful person.
The main thing is that this should not stop you from trying to develop yourself. We develop not for someone, but for ourselves (strictly speaking, this is not entirely accurate, but in general it is true). Listen, for exampleHow do I learn math at the age of 32 to become a data science specialist?
I have noticed that most people develop up to a certain point in time, and then there is an inner awareness and at this stage the individual freezes, like water at a low temperature turns into ice. I don't agree with the idea that an undeveloped person can find the answer in a difficult situation. His mind is limited and only there is he at a height where you can solve without mental strain within the limits of your limitations without going beyond the limits of your knowledge. Is it possible to be envious of those who have lost the creative process of inference ? No and no again. Euphoria, from thinking, like a sip from a hot drink, it brings a person to a state of God-likeness… We don't know what will happen next.For many people, this is very important, but it is not solved. All life and the whole world is a mystery. We have come with her and will go to the land where there is peace and grace.
People think more about survival in the material world – the thirst for money, power, creating comfortable conditions for themselves. In this regard, such people forget about their soul. The soul begins to be lazy. Laziness is a barrier to improving the soul, one of which is reading books. Reading books is a more spiritual activity-filling the soul with beautiful, interesting, informative things. It is desirable to keep a balance, a balance between the material and the spiritual. Always answering any question is not the truth of the answer. People with a bright soul try to answer truthfully, without deceiving the interlocutor. Others-who do not think about the soul, including those who do not read books – can “beautifully” hypocrite, invent various “fairy tales” to answer any question.
It's hard to say that if you don't read books, you will become a successful person. Most successful people, on the contrary, read a lot of literature.
In this case, it's more like comparing practitioners and theorists. If we don't live out the knowledge we receive, we simply lose it. Therefore, if we constantly read books, but at the same time in life we do not take concrete steps to achieve our goals, then this simply remains a theory. So let's say these people learn directly in “combat conditions”, and then, filling a bunch of cones, gain experience. This experience takes them to a new level, and so on. Therefore, they become really wise people, having experienced everything firsthand.
Theorists without past experience remain theorists, just as if practitioners read the theory, they could avoid a lot of mistakes. Everything is interconnected and should not be separated from each other. It all depends only on how a person applies specific knowledge.
Well, no… nobody fantasize anything!!! The answer here is completely different. It's all about the EIP. Unified Information Field. Those who can connect always know the correct answer. Even in fairy tales, this is strongly hinted at. A person is not able to store all the information in the brain. The brain only stores the path to the file, but not the file itself!!!
You are not grouping concepts correctly. Those who set goals and move towards them using reading (and learning in general)achieve more. as a means to increase your life success. All other things being equal (let's not forget that ordinary luck plays a huge role in life's success: where would Billy Gates have been if he hadn't fallen under the feet of managers from IBM, who at that very moment quarreled with the developers of CP/M-86, which is why they desperately needed an operating system for the IBM PC personal computer-albeit not the best, but “reading and developing” a purposeful and ambitious person always has an advantage over the same purposeful and ambitious, but illiterate and having a narrow outlook.
The problem is that too often “reading and developing” just masks infantilism and replaces active actions in the real world. Instead of moving your career, improving your professional skills, looking for a niche for a successful business and developing this business, a person reads books about “how to build a company correctly to earn a million”. Or, even worse, he doesn't even read such a book, but he is absolutely sure that the sacred knowledge of how Leo Tolstoy differs from Alexey Tolstoy, how many old ladies need to be cut down for a ruble, and why Anna Karenina got hit by an electric train in itself puts him above the rest, and the benefits of life should fall on him from the sky without the slightest effort. Alas, this does not happen. If the thought does not precede the action , it is useless. Learning without applying the acquired knowledge is just self-satisfaction, spiritual masturbation.
Because while some people read books and “engage in self-education”, others work at jobs for money and communicate with people. To learn how to live, you need not only to read books, but also to live in the real world, to get in touch with it.
A stupid person is always sure that he is right. A smart person doubts even his own words. Something like that. The smart one will analyze the risks while the dumb one will just take the risk)
There is an interesting theory about this.
The fact is that the more a person knows, the more they assess the risks. As a result, there may be a fear of difficulties that you have already seen in advance.
A person who has less knowledge is more likely to take risks. And faces difficulties along the way, I do not load my head with the upcoming difficulties.
Despite this, it is worth understanding that everything is individual, but as a rule, everything works like this.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is to blame!
It consists in the fact that people who have a low level of qualification make erroneous conclusions, make unsuccessful decisions, and at the same time are not able to realize their mistakes due to their low level of qualification. This leads them to have overestimated ideas about their own abilities.
Highly qualified people, on the contrary, tend to underestimate their abilities and suffer from a lack of confidence in their abilities, considering others more competent. Thus, less competent people generally have a higher opinion of their own abilities than is typical of competent people (who also tend to assume that others rate their abilities as low as they do). Also, people with high skill levels mistakenly believe that tasks that are easy for them are just as easy for other people.
Welcome! @vicajam
Very often, reading and reading make it difficult to make a quick decision, since a person who thinks and reads always has a doubt: am I thinking and doing the right thing?
Those who read little, on the contrary, are always sure that they are right, because there is no critical thinking, they are always focused on action. Literally like animals: I saw the danger and immediately got into a fight, or run away. it depends on the potential of the opponent. Have you seen a thinking boxer?
Therefore, those who don't read or don't read much are more likely to be ready for action than those who read and think.
Those who act on the spot may make mistakes, but their action immediately shows the result, and after completing it, you can see where the correction is needed. This will lead to rapid enrichment.
But such a person will not be able to master serious projects. Maximum buy-sell with profit.
Therefore, I tend to read and think.
Those who read and develop tend to reason and, accordingly, doubt. Such people are called the intelligentsia. A person who does not ask questions acts more effectively and, often, is not limited by moral principles.
The simplest and most obvious answer is: because a person who knows something will doubt it, because they realize the possibility of being wrong. A person who does not encounter a large amount of knowledge will always be confident in their limited experience. This partly reflects the famous Dunning-Kruger effect: at some stage of development, a person doubts too much about their own competence, while without deep experience and practice, a person is overly confident in himself.
Excessive confidence in their own knowledge, people who do not develop intellectually, can be compared with the standard of living. When a person lives in the middle of slums, but lives better than others, he feels more important, and therefore more confident. When the same person moves to a more affluent area, they may feel really poor. A person who is constantly confronted with development, reading, knowledge, and ideas will constantly face the realization of their own incompetence, and therefore will doubt. A person who reads and develops can also find something to answer, but he needs to gain confidence in his ideas, and this is almost impossible to do if the pace of learning and development dictates a constant change in himself. In other words, to find something to answer, you just need to develop and learn to turn thoughts into words, and this is already a certain social skill that manifests itself only in society.
I also asked myself this question, because almost always and everywhere they say that only well-read people can beautifully present their thoughts, confidently argue, etc., but I also have an uncle who only read fairy tales in elementary school and everything, nevertheless he is one of those people who are always listened to in the company of people, there were many cases when during normal communication he persuaded people
I believe that your leadership skills, which have been developed since childhood, play a more important role.
Nevertheless, a well-read person will always stand out in the manner and technique of communication, but no more than that.
Everyone has their own opinion. Even if this opinion is “rented” from others.
Also, one of the reasons for this behavior may be the lack of fear of appearing stupid “in public”.
Another question is if you are satisfied and surprised by the depth of such people's answers, and that is why you asked such a question.
In this case, it may be an innate intuitive depth of knowledge of the world, which cannot be replaced by book knowledge.
Because they have ready answers to everything . He answers superficially without delving into the essence of the question and therefore considers his answer to be correct , but if you ask him a couple of questions about why, he understands that he does not know the truth . In general, there is an answer to any question , but each answer gives rise to new questions, and the more persistent a person is, the more he is ready to look for an answer and dive deeper into the topic . However, this is a chore and therefore much easier and easier to respond with templates .
Such people do not have a special ability to analyze and introspect. They act according to the logic of “loading straight” , “who is more impudent, that is more right”.
But the rest of the erudites have a problem in the field of “woe from wit”.
I have never seen such people achieve more. But I know one thing for sure-if there is a desire to reach real heights in one area, without reading the theoretical part, the chances of success are absolute zero.
And everyone can answer something. It will be much more difficult to give a competent, relevant and correctly formulated answer. And to be able to give such an answer, you need to read. Anything from fiction to technical reference books.
The answer is banal: the talent of a manager and the talent of a scientist, researcher, or philosopher are two different things. I've seen somewhere that only 5% of people can be entrepreneurs.
“to achieve more in life” is usually understood simply as making money. Pichalka, but the fact that the talent of making money is not related to creative or athletic abilities. Life is what it is. And if you can't be an entrepreneur, then you can't accept that you won't become a millionaire. And to develop as a person is not in the pursuit of money.
The more a person develops, the wider his horizons become, the more new questions, nuances, shades and semitones arise. Everything seems more complicated and confusing. He begins to doubt his knowledge and himself. He is aware of the ambiguity and dependence of the truth of the judgment on the context, situation, time, place, personality and even mood of the interlocutor, etc. He feels more responsible for his erroneous judgments. For an answer, he needs time to think about everything, compare it.
A person who is not particularly developed does not burden himself with all these complexities of thinking. Everything is simple for him and all the answers are on the surface. What I heard, I told you. “Everyone can't be wrong, but we are not worse than everyone else” – a phrase from the movie “Mary Poppins goodbye”, well illustrates the worldview of such a person.
The most interesting thing is that people who have reached very high heights in their development also become simple, easy and understandable. But this is a different, filled simplicity. Calm and confident as eternity itself. Her name is Wisdom.
the more knowledge you have, the more doubts you have…in the end, a knowledge-filled mind begins to understand what is really going on…he doesn't know anything.knowledge, the present…it comes only through experience,through living this or that information…and if you know and do not do it, then information does not become knowledge and the mind overloaded with information does not know how to do anything…only thinks.information-action-experience-knowledge.as if so.or some interpretation of the mind…people who don't read or develop just go the other way…they practice constantly.this is their development…in delanje
because they are naturally erudite and intellectually developed people. Not every person who reads it is able to give an answer. Sometimes a person reads,but can't retell it. He understands for himself. Therefore, reading and development are not an indicator of how well adapted and connected a person is. Everything is individual
Strange question, but clear to me. The fact is that these people do not occupy their space with anything at all. After all, everything we read and watch is recorded in our subconscious. And then something starts working against us. For example, if you read negative news, then very soon you will start to be afraid. No matter what , you will feel it. From constant stress, you can damage your sense of fear. And it's a lot of trouble. It can do such things in the fate of a person.
So even if a person doesn't read as much as you do, it doesn't mean they don't have the courage to make a decision when they need to. After all, in life, most often you need to be at the right time and in the right place. And then think about it. And in general, I will say that people who do not overexert their consciousness and lead a measured lifestyle. In terms of mind and feelings. They will always be ahead of those who try to click only on knowledge and do not pay attention to their feelings.
Reading does not equal development in the general sense. Reading is more about gathering information. Development is different. For example, spiritual development involves discarding all previously acquired knowledge and stopping stuffing yourself with any kind of information. Hence the answer to your question: the less information you have in your head, the cleaner your intuitive perception is, and the less data you need to process in order to dig out the most plausible answer in your head. For people who develop spiritually, the answers come intuitively and immediately because the way information is processed and perceived changes along the way of such growth and development. This is how brilliant works are created. None of those who read and live by book knowledge have yet created anything decent and brilliant. Therefore, do not consider non-reading people stooges) Ultimately, experience shows the opposite. Anyway, mine)
If you went to school, you won't be out of college,
It also means that you've calibrated yourself.
For you, the price is known, how much you are worth now,
And they'll measure out exactly that much, believe me.
If you were a quitter at school, you didn't finish college,
It also means that you didn't measure yourself.
And now no one can, even if you break into pieces,
Say something about you, maybe you'll be an oligarch…
About scientists instead of speech, their diplomas say,
And the brains of the poor devils under the yoke for specifics are in a hurry.
They pay modestly for the caliber, they won't let you get rich,
And the brand of the caliber-the price tag, nowhere else to put.
Those who did not strain their brains did not waste time in vain,
They conquer all heights, because they don't know what they can't do…
They did not create a standard, there is no stigma and there is no measure,
They are the masters today, and the study is just light…
The question comes from a strange, possibly distorted, statistic. In fact, it is those who develop who achieve it. If you really noticed this in a certain sample, then most likely the fact is that your “those who read” are simply less active by themselves, have less volitional and activity potential – and, accordingly, they do and receive less, and sometimes the accumulation of information becomes a valuable activity in itself and takes part of the potential from achievements.
However, all other things being equal, someone who has studied and developed certainly achieves more.
I don't agree.
Not always, not for everyone!
I can assume that the questions are not the ones that you should think about and weigh every word before answering.
From experience, I can say the following. They will try to answer, but if you are riding in the topic of the question, like we are in oil, then everyone who answers has a sad experience. For the solutions, as well as the answer, can be many. Ask a well-thought-out question, you should know at least three answers to it, later ask a counter-question, specify why your interlocutor gives such an answer, then you will get what I understand you are preparing for, your not well-read and not developed opponent will swim… Only practice and personal experience!!))) Live up to the end, ask the right, specific questions and do not be afraid of the answers and you will be happy, you will see the difference!!)))
There are many opinions on this matter. People who choose for themselves the path of experiment, or the empirical path, will always argue with the theorist, simply because they have clearly received the results of their “research”. You can spend a very long time and hard time building a hypothesis about how to ride a bicycle, or you can just sit on it and go. Yes, to fall a couple of times, yes, to experience problems with braking, but sooner or later to understand exactly how to go. And in the end, such a practical cyclist will outperform any theorist, just showing him your broken knees and saying: “You see, I can show you from my own experience that everything you have written in your paper theories is complete nonsense and heresy!”
So it is in real life: often practitioners prevail over theorists. Perhaps we don't know everything about our opponent? Maybe they watch documentaries, prefer them to books, or constantly search for information on the Internet, and you think that this is not equivalent to replacing paper literature.
And another important aspect: do not confuse “not development” and having your own hard opinion. Suppose when a person says “I don't want to start reading Crime and Punishment because I'm too lazy and it's very voluminous” – this is one thing. But when a person says,” I don't read Dostoevsky because I don't like his work, it's dark, depressing and hopeless, ” this is quite another.
the answers that say that we may have information, but we may not be able to apply it, raise doubts due to the possibility of asking a counter-question – how do we have the means to apply it, if not the knowledge? after all, we can not be doomed to our original abilities?
I have an assumption about this: initially, we have some abilities, and they naturally develop involuntarily. in addition, as we develop, more and more new ones open up to us. I imagine the process of development as moving through the tonelle with a torch – the more we are illuminated, the more paths are open to us, and the more can be illuminated…
It seems to me that reading and human development are not always interrelated. A person may not like the literature and works of Russian or foreign classics, but they can perfectly master one of the musical instruments. To understand physics at the same time in school to have a 3 in it.
I believe that few people without the desire and desire for something more, achieve some heights in life. And readiness to overcome difficulties, life lessons learned, responsibility-this is already a development that is not always written about in books!)
People are different in structure and connections with society.
Conventionally, they can be divided into 3 groups: with a mental orientation, with the manifestation of an emotionally-evaluating system of views, and business people who implement programs of the material world.
Mentalists can be roughly attributed to people who receive and transmit information flows to various parts of the system. Only at the highest level of information transmission are favorable conditions created that ensure material prosperity.
For example, imagine a primary school teacher: who knows a lot-cries a lot (a phrase from the play).
For further development of the situation, it is necessary to be willing to use the information obtained in specific practical schemes. A system of decision counterweights is formed based on the activities of an emotionally motivated group of people. Basically, they are deputy supervisors and they have the task of combining and preparing the final decision.
.People with strong-willed and organizational skills are engaged in breaking through and materializing projects. Among this group, you can often meet the heads and chairmen of organizations.
What group does the author belong to, this is the life that Fate intended for him.
Once, not so long ago, I came across an article about the 200 richest people in Russia. So, of these 200, 200 have one, two or more higher educations. Everything is learned by comparison.
I think it's because these people don't care if they answer correctly or not. They say what they think. And they don't have any doubts. Therefore, they achieve more. They need it and they think it's the right thing to do.
Success is just a concept, some criterion, you can put anything into it.
In different historical and social formations, it was different, but something remained. Once considered a success, the number of slaves owned, gold, concubines, furs. But none of the tsars or even emperors dreamed of how the current richest people – capitalists-live now. Having all the material resources of society, they throw dice to the working population. This success stupefies the population, which instead of fighting for their labor rights, chooses the winding path of a huckster, a speculator.
Our zoo civilization is ideally suited for the career of zoo-type people. Very rude actions too often have a huge practical personal effect/benefit.
Why did you decide that? Such people respond out of place and off-topic, and their opinions are not respected or accepted. If a person has a poor vocabulary, it's not interesting to talk to them
Because they are perfectly socialized, their communication skills are developed due to observation, the ability to listen and hear others, analyze, compare with previously received information. I'll give you an example: A 12-year-old boy came to my speech development classes. He immediately said that he would not read anything. I retold the works to him, and during the discussion of each subsequent story, he compared the events with the previous information and made simply amazing deep conclusions. And he graduated with a gold medal.
As practice shows, such people just take it and do it, do not calculate the options and possible outcomes in their head. And those who have extensive knowledge, begin to scroll through them in their head applying them to a specific situation. If you turn to ARIZ, they are not specialists, they find a solution to a particular problem much faster than specialists in a particular field, because they do not bother, but simply fantasize and experiment
Here you need to understand what is meant by knowledge and development. Knowledge gained only from books and not backed up by your own experience is one thing. For example, if this is the case, then such specialists “treat the human soul” on the Internet as in an anthill. But the knowledge gained from wise books for understanding your own ” I ” gives a precious experience. When you understand yourself, you can always help a person. No, not to solve his problem. It's just that you've already learned and are learning to understand yourself. This is a precious experience. And a person who has taken this path can help another person find this light, find their own path. Such knowledge is impossible without development. I don't know of any other development.
Develop your intelligence – it's like making a smartphone out of a push-button phone. This is the development of a comfortable and convenient external life. That's all.
I believe that such people can only achieve temporary success, with the help of the circumstances that have developed in their favor and the speed of reaction. Quick response is due to the fact that there is little information in their head, they do not need to dig through the archives of knowledge to answer. Time will put everything in its place and really smart will reach heights.
Because they know how to live, even if they don't know how to read, but they know how to live.The world is like this.
Therefore, we need to live as we want.Without paying attention to others.
What do you mean, they find something to answer, maybe they are talking nonsense or just avoiding a direct answer! And at the expense of success, often at the expense of other people, friends whose moral principles do not allow you to do one way or another,and people without knowledge and intelligence, the decision is made easier. Well, for example, Steal, Deceive, Betray and you are in “chocolate”. An unenviable success,and you'll have to answer for everything…
We can only partially agree with this thesis. Not all people in this category always find something to say. First, a lot depends on the person, his personality, upbringing. Secondly, it is necessary to take into account the context, the conditions in which a person is here and now. For example, a young man in a familiar company can be bold, but when answering questions from the draft board of the military enlistment office, he can “get into a stupor”.
Well, it depends on the person himself, on how much he quickly sorts and assimilates the material.
Let's say I don't like to read one book, and give all my time only to it(I don't think it's effective) I run through the eye and understand approximately its essence, how much the author is creative and what kind of person he is. I move on to the other one. I like to go to bookstores and libraries to see what books were written at all and what are fashionable, and then briefly try to study on the Internet.
On the Internet, you can quickly peek, a very powerful tool, you need to be able to use it and know the features.
I will gladly fall into this trap and create the impression of a person who does not read or develop, but answers any questions))
Reading and developing often makes us doubt that we are right, but to admit that not everyone was wrong, so we are afraid to be wrong and do not let other people's ideas and thoughts into our heads.
One of the reasons may be that people who are poorly developed do not have many options for how to answer, few things come to their mind at the moment of need, and more well-read and intelligent people should choose the most appropriate answer from the majority of options.
Smarter people calculate which answer, for example, in an argument, can become more profitable, they think about the submission of the answer, how to answer, and not just What to answer. And less developed, in intellectual terms, people-less “steam”.
Again, this is my subjective opinion about only one possible reason why people who are not developing enough always find something to answer. Some may agree, some may not.
Thanks for the interesting question)
Because people who don't read or develop DON't ALWAYS find something to say. And they do NOT achieve more in life.
Your question initially contains a logical error called petitio principii. You base your question on the obviously unproven assumption that people who don't read are more successful. And this, at least, is unreliable.
There is, however, a version that limited people are more successful in business, and this is partly true, because they do not see the risks and stick to where a more developed person will not climb. But this applies to a very narrow and low-level sector of the market: put up a tent, open a bar… But on the contrary, the boards of directors of multinational corporations are filled with people who read a lot of things.
Because those who read think that they know everything,they act according to the rules written in the book. Thus driving yourself into the framework of a particular book. And they don't develop their own opinions.
And those who do not read, they rely on themselves, on their intuition and their temptations.
Are you sure there's more? I am convinced that the goals of the Buzovs and the Perelmans are different. And compare them with one criterion- ” who has more money-he is more successful.” I encounter this when I talk to people, when I suggest that they become rich-I suggest that they make a financial plan and change their lives. Many people ask me what kind of car I have, what kind of apartment I have, and some say that if you drove a Moseratti, I would learn from you… Most people don't understand what it means to be successful and rich. And that is why we have so many poor and unsuccessful people. And after all, everyone is looking for a path to success, but not there at all… Wealth is not money, wealth is opportunities. And-unsuitable.
That you, dear philosopher, decide by your own measure who is successful and who is not.You are not successful, and reading books will not make you successful and developed.Don't be jealous.
Not all people who do not read or develop always find something to answer… etc. It would be better to name a couple of specific examples: who exactly is not developing and why they have achieved success.
If a person does not go for a word in his pocket, then he is most likely already a specialist (at least in verbiage). Most often, these are people who act, they do not particularly spend time thinking. Yes, sometimes our “thinkers” just leave the activity in this way: “let's think again…” – they are afraid to plunge into the activity, it is more convenient to sit with a book. And C students often turn out to be good practitioners, and, moreover, they have learned to give themselves the right to make mistakes ( their school could not finish them off). So they succeed – and rightly so, those who struggle will succeed in the end.
You need to read and develop, but don't forget that to succeed, you also need to DO and Feel, that is, have emotional intelligence to build a team.
What makes you think that? There are resourceful people, and some are slow-witted. This does not mean that the former are smarter than the latter. You need to develop all your life, but a higher education diploma does not mean that its owner is intellectually developed. Education is a set of knowledge that you need to be able to use. And one more thing: don't confuse practicality with intelligence:)
Reading is not always the best way to develop. Where did this misconception come from? Do you think reading suffering Russian classics will develop you?)
The brain is a projector, and it doesn't matter if you're watching a movie or reading a book. The way of development is for you to choose, since you do it for yourself, as many smart people have said here.
In any case, the facts are as follows::
1) People who read a lot may not be developed in life. Every book has its own ideas. But only life will show useful or harmful ones. The beliefs that a person takes from books may be wrong and cannot be tested in the real world.
The same applies to STUDYING any kind of INFORMATION. Actually, the correct question is how well a person can work and communicate. This is one of the factors that determines development.
So it's not about reading, it's not about religion or philosophy, it's not about humanities or techies. If one person condemns the other, considering their rightness absolute, this is fanaticism. A fanatic cannot be developed by definition.
I know people who don't read much, but they understand life many times better than those who do. Apparently, the right decisions are made, which are not based on books, but on experience.
2) ” They always find something to say.” In this case, maybe they have a better speech development and level of Russian language proficiency than you do?
Or are they just not shy about who they are? (and this is also a plus by the way), we are always not perfect)
The question is how and what they answer. You can hammer it out in one chord, or you can deliver your message in a detailed way. And by the way, it is not necessary to argue with them, they can live their own point of view and they may not need “someone else's charter” and a view on development. Each of us has our own rules in the world.
But the inability to protect yourself is clearly not an indicator of development. And the method of protection may be different.
And again, the interlocutor can carry information. Sometimes the answer is an honest “I need to think about this.” Because you need to be able to admit that you don't know the answer right now. Therefore, it may not exist. In this case, it's just your truth. No response.
Either the other person's worldview is strikingly different from yours and this can cause a stupor.
In this case, if you know for sure that you will not accept this information and live by it, you can always say that you remain with your opinion. Even if it does not coincide with the opinion of the other 6,999,999,999 people on the planet. “Someone else's charter, this is someone else's charter.” Not yours.
3) About “achieve more”
Everyone knows how cool the son or daughter of my mother's friend is) In fact, this joke became a kind of immunity that children born in the 2000s developed. Parents who have achieved little look at the success of other people's children and think: “well, why do we have such a bad guy?”
Stereotypical thinking. Nothing that says anything about development.
Most often, template things are applied to success criteria.
For example:
1) ” He(She) is 22 years old, and he / she already has his / her own business, car, and generally a person does not need anything.”
“Sports or rapid career growth here.”
– Question, do you personally need it? The responsibility is serious.
-Do you even know the history of at least one specific person so deeply that you worry about why something is wrong with you? This person may have a huge support group, including parents, relatives, friends, inheritance, he could pass on the business and he may actually be fucked and with serious problems.
My point is that such success is possible under certain CONDITIONS. If there are no prerequisites for these conditions, you can't move in them, or it's just not the right time. For example, if your parents really think about you as I wrote above, this is a factor of a negative condition and the influence of a person on you should be excluded because it is destructive.
2) “Sveta of your age has already had her second child, a good husband and generally a strong family, and you are still in girls and you are 29”
– Question. Do you need it? Family may not be your priority. And this is normal. There are a lot of interesting things in this world, but for some reason they reduce everything to 2-3. Moronism. The same common misconception about marriage is that people are more responsible and serious. Uh-huh, especially those who got married for the sake of free borscht, or for the sake of money. It's very easy not to stink and already smells. Similarly, fuck all those morons who shit on cohabitation. Everything is decided only by how the person treats you, you to him. This is what you have in your life.
And it is useful for others to hint not to meddle in their own business and put their charter in their wallet deeper.
– Everything always looks beautiful from the outside. Neither those who cite Svetka as an example, nor you KNOW what is really going on in this family and what problems they have. Someone says that now the stupid generation of Instagram. No, it all started much earlier. It's just been digitized now.
– People who say that can only pursue their own personal interests. For example, to babysit your grandchildren. Without asking you if you want it now (or at all) or not.
A pattern of development I want to tell you. Respect and courtesy, again does not stink already smells. I don't say anything about love or free will at all. Urgently drink rastishku for development))))
Therefore, you need to first determine what development is. It's not just knowledge, or the level of education. Here everything is much bigger and more complicated.
Many people said above that we develop for ourselves.
To understand what to develop, we need to know what we have.
Find out who we are.
You can't develop what you don't have.
The question is clearly related to selfishness and does not depend much on the occupation. No selfishness, no problems… But only great selfishness allows you to go to the goal. You need to know not only others, but also yourself…
Because our language is boneless and we stupidly know everything how it should be and how to live…I'M LIKE THAT MYSELF…but I like to read stupidly Cosmo and a book of fiction and I also have a girl's memory and I forget all about scientific articles…and I stupidly don't know the school curriculum because dvoishnitsa and troishnitsa and so I can support a conversation on any topic…But if I don't know anything, I'll tell you honestly…
I immediately want to object! Because the person who reads is not always necessarily developing.
Not all people who don't read always find something to say. And it also happens that they can't find answers to questions on the multiplication table.
But if we assume that I understood the question in the sense that I should, then: these people are already satisfied with much, much that they have read and much that they have learned – they do not need to rethink what the value of which has already been determined for them!
You can't stop being a moron and a redneck. The division into Plebeian and patrician classes occurs even in childhood at the stage of forms and methods of education and filling the child with educational skills.
A person, directly, from hand to hand, from heart to heart, from image to image, who receives knowledge and education from his enlightened and educated parents, and not hired teachers and tutors, for the most part always thinks more flexibly and broadly than a schoolboy or “tutor”.
The family man gets his development “with milk and comfort” of the natural environment of the family and the father's house, in which the atmosphere itself is aimed at a broad outlook, development. Such a “graduate” sometimes does not even need to read books, since he receives all the necessary algorithms for a competitive life in society from a young age.
Ask him how he knows about the existence of, for example, perigee and apogee. He may find it difficult to answer you, because he doesn't even remember when his father or mother told him about it, he considers this knowledge commonplace, like knowing where is right and where is left. But for a schoolboy or a child reading books, on the contrary, this knowledge comes from the subject of astronomy or the material read by him from a book (some kind of “Astronomy for little ones”). Two forms of knowledge acquisition determine who will be more agile and flexible to apply them in practice. Without much difficulty, you can understand that in the first case-a family one, a person will be more natural in doing this, and the second person will still need to read a book to confirm their guess about the possibility of applying this or that knowledge in the current circumstances.
Why did you decide that if a person doesn't read, then they don't develop? On the contrary, they make the brain think, and not rely on other people's opinions. In this way, you get extraordinary, unconventional thoughts and advice. I think this is the most expensive thing in psychology.
Perhaps in the cases you mentioned, there is a Dunning-Kruger effect: less competent people are more confident because they are unable to understand the risks due to their incompetence, and more competent and analytical people are in constant doubt because they know where and what they can make a mistake. Plus all sorts of advice like “Try to understand the point of view of the interlocutor”, which is followed by people from the second category.
There is a proverb: one fool will ask so many questions that a hundred clever ones will not answer. I think it's the same reason here.
In general, our lifestyle is such that education in it is pursued as something indecent. A person is characterized by conformism. Trying to appear different is frowned upon. The questions themselves often stem from an uneducated state. A well-read person will think before answering. And the average person says what everyone else (like him) says. And if the answer is ordinary, then it is acceptable. And the new is perceived cautiously. Almost everyone is afraid of change.
On the score of success, I must say that success is different. The success of a philosopher and the success of a businessman are different. According to the lifestyle of the average person, success is brought by an average acceptable life for the majority. If you do what the powerful approve of, you will also succeed.
And there are those for whom success is to educate or teach, to serve or help someone. We need to understand what we want, and then success will correspond to our life.
For me, as a 16-year – old teenager living in a tough environment (school), where all the instincts of a person are clearly expressed, everything is simple. The same person who represents nothing at all behaves more relaxed and confident in conversation, due to the fact that he constantly applies his insignificant knowledge in practice. Another thing is when there is a huge stock of knowledge, but it is not possible to apply it. Thus, under the influence of constant practice, a person becomes more adapted to the world around them, thereby achieving success in a particular area.
The question is wrong!
People have lived without books for centuries. And many lived successfully. This TIME,
Modern people are 11 years old (this is a minimum), they are crammed with book wisdom in all places. That's TWO.
You don't even have to be able to read. I somehow had to configure WINDOWS in Chinese. I don't understand hieroglyphs at all, but for people like me, the developers have provided the menu with pictures. According to the end of the 20th century, half of American college graduates could not read their diploma – and the United States flourished. That's THREE.
In order to answer something, you don't need to know anything at all. Don't believe me? Loudly and with an expression, ask a smart question to someone else's dog or an active crow – they usually answer right away. That's FOUR.
And most importantly-for success, it is not quantity that matters, but quality! A person who creatively applies the advice of his father or Uncle Vasya will be more successful than an excellent student who has filled his brain with hundreds of books. And development is not about reading and absorbing, but about working and applying. That's FIVE!
Natural resourcefulness is such a mysterious thing… Then Zen will hit, then a direct connection with the cosmos will be established. The main thing is not to know, but to feel and trust life. Didn't you know?
Here, it would seem, everything is simple – you take and develop. You've bought a book and you're reading it. Or go to the gym, grab a barbell, and do whatever you want. But no! If everything were simple, there would be a lot more people involved in self-development.
There are many factors that prevent us from improving without them.
willpower
Psychologists have long argued about what willpower is, why some people have it and others don't, and what to do about it. We conducted a lot of experiments and research and came to the conclusion that willpower is a personal quality that can be developed like a muscle. And its presence is mainly determined by upbringing and habits laid down in childhood. Those who had disciplined and strong-willed parents who developed these qualities in their children were lucky. If the family does not have this-well, the path will be long, but it is quite possible for everyone to pass it.
What is important in defining willpower as a concept is this: because of this quality of personality, we can follow our decisions and do everything necessary to achieve our goals, without succumbing to laziness, unwillingness or procrastination.
How to develop willpower? There are two main methods: doing and not doing. Doing – performing unpleasant or boring, but useful actions, such as exercising in the morning. Non-doing is a conscious refusal to take actions that are harmful. For example, from smoking or overeating.
By the way, church fasting is just a practice aimed at training willpower: by refusing certain foods, we learn to control ourselves. If you dig even deeper, it turns out that all religions have similar practices of giving up food, comfort, possessions, certain thoughts or actions. This is because the technique of non-doing strengthens willpower much more.
Willpower is a spiritual quality of the highest grade, one of the most important for a person. By developing it, you can radically change your life. Have you heard the phrase: “I know what's right, but for some reason I do the opposite”? That's what people with undeveloped willpower say.
motivation
Motivation is a powerful force. When a person really wants something, he is ready to move mountains. Something didn't work out? So, they didn't want it badly. After all, when you really want a cake, are you ready to go for it three kilometers to the night supermarket?
It turns out that you need to teach yourself how to want correctly? Exactly! Our cunning brain is designed to save energy, as Mother evolution ordered. And he will come up with excuses to discourage his master from unnecessary work: “Well, why is this necessary? We're fine as it is! Oh, look, a new message in the messenger! Look,look, the kittens in the picture!”
THEREFORE, YOU NEED TO APPLY A TRICK AGAINST THE ATTITUDES OF YOUR OWN SUBCONSCIOUS MIND, WHICH IS LAZY AND WANTS ONLY TO HAVE FUN.
How do I motivate myself to work? First of all, you need to set the right goals, because even the best motivation will not work when you do not understand what you want, or set false goals imposed by society. For example, money or status. If you listen to yourself, you may find that what you really want to do is hitchhike or volunteer in Africa, rather than spin around like a squirrel to satisfy other people's needs.
More on the blog: 10 laws of the path to true wealth
So, having set the right goal, we concretize and visualize it. What kind of business? What will you do, target audience, idea, team, slogan, theme colors? What kind of house? How many floors, is there a garage, basement, sauna, how many rooms?
For example, you want to start a business, but you've never been in business. Create conditions in which you can understand how such an activity suits you: for example, sign up for the free business game “Your Start”. This is a business simulator where you can start and develop your business in a fun and safe way, getting a lot of useful information about entrepreneurship in the process.
After concretizing and visualizing, we need to be mindful of our goal and its positive emotional components. Constantly imagine how you will be engaged in interesting projects within the business or choose curtains for the bedroom in your home. Think about the good things.
Do not doubt your abilities, believe in victory and do not assume other options. People who have achieved high performance in life are often asked: “How did you manage to implement such a complex project?” In response, many of them say: “I've made a decision that I have to follow this path to the end, whatever it is.”
memory
Memory is very important for a harmonious personality. We need the ability to memorize information and use it all the time: in school, work, and even entertainment. You can only keep up a conversation when you have something interesting to say. And how to do this if you can't think of the plot of the book you've read, or the twists and turns of your own journey?
For successful work, memory is one of the main tools. The more a person achieves, the more information flows through them. How to deal with it if the “flash drive” does not hold large volumes? Record everything? Well, no, that's not the way out.
Memory, like all other qualities, can be developed through exercise. For example, read how to get smarter in 15 minutes a day and apply this information in practice.
self-development
Time planning
It is impossible to perform complex and multi-stage work without planning all its steps. This also applies to self-development. Anyone who wants to change their life for the better should have a plan for the year, month, week, and day.
But you also need to be able to plan. Not everyone is able to make real and feasible plans from the first time. Therefore, we recommend that you learn the 25 rules of time planning so that this skill makes your work easier, not harder.
There are planning secrets that optimize your work so much that you wonder where I used to put so much time? To learn how to use all 24 hours correctly, take a free course that will help you increase your productivity.
discipline
Discipline is another whale of self-development, without which you can not do without. All practices aimed at improvement require constant and routine repetition. Anyone can go for a jog once, every third person can hold out for a week, and only a few can turn running into an integral part of the schedule.
More on the blog: How to get lucky: two stories of one person
Discipline is necessary in order to give up bad habits, and in order to adhere to the daily routine, and to accustom yourself to proper nutrition.
You also need discipline to fight one of the worst enemies of development – laziness. Finding the answers to the question of how to overcome laziness, we become closer to our goals.
psychology
Our results largely depend on our thinking and attitudes. If you think, ” I'm not going to make it anyway,” then it will. If you think all rich people are thieves and scoundrels, then you will never become rich – we don't want to be bad. If you are sure that “all men are goats”, then you will meet such a companion.
How to think and what to think is up to us. Learn how to think effectively – and you will save a lot of time and effort that you spent on introspection, worries and destructive emotions.
SELF-ESTEEM
A person accepts only what he considers himself worthy of. The level of income, attention of the opposite sex and other life criteria each sets for himself.
Unrealistic self-esteem (overestimated or undervalued) prevents its owner from realizing himself in life. We commit illogical actions and make a choice in favor of losing, subconsciously believing that this should be our fate. Failure, suffering, and dealing with toxic people are all the choices of a person with unhealthy self-esteem.
To correct the situation, you need to understand the causes of low self-esteem and try to eliminate them. Often they are hidden in deep childhood, are associated with the divorce of parents or bullying at school – such things are very difficult to let go, but necessary.
SELF-CONFIDENCE
I will succeed, successful people tell themselves. They are confident that they can achieve more, and even if they fail, they continue to believe that they will succeed, but next time.
The most important resource of a person is himself. You need to trust yourself, believe in yourself, respect yourself and love.
How many people hate themselves… They don't even want to buy nice clothes because they “don't deserve it.” Before you start developing, you need to find the answer to the question: how to love yourself? Self-improvement is impossible without self-love…
A HARMONIOUS PERSONALITY IS STRONG IN ALL ASPECTS OF LIFE AT THE SAME TIME. TO DEVELOP YOURSELF EVENLY, YOU NEED TO MAKE A STEP-BY-STEP PLAN THAT INCLUDES ALL THE MAIN GROWTH VECTORS.
This plan is different for everyone. One solves integrals in his head, but has not yet learned how to build relationships with the opposite sex, the second throws a two-pound weight with one left hand, but at the same time has read only one book in his entire life. And the third may even come to the understanding that they really can't do anything and haven't developed any of the vectors.
When building a plan, you need to take into account all areas, but at the same time perform supportive work where you have already achieved success (so that there is no bias in the opposite direction) and devote more time to those areas that are not yet developed.
This is an extremely controversial thesis. What kind of people, what do they read, in what direction do they develop, and what does “more” mean? The evaluation criteria are set in a narrow reality tunnel
people who don't develop, I think, have other reasons to achieve more in life. Maybe they have the right environment.. There is such a formula for success: 10% knowledge + 40%thinking + 50% environment = success
Because they don't need to search out the essence of a million analyzed materials. They do not need to go through ideas, evaluate them from different angles and use analysis to choose the appropriate answer.
They say what they know and what the other people want to hear. And our brain likes to be told what we want to hear… Here, too, intuition plays a role, while a well-read person is looking for an answer in knowledge, a person who is getting out of it is prompted by intuition, which works many times faster.
And here is an example. Oral interview. The HR department sets a task from the work schedule. “We don't have enough helmets for all miners,the commission will come tomorrow, what should we do?” A smart person will sit and calculate, calculate budgets and look for the perfect option, a simple person will say:”Let's send some of the workers to another facility tomorrow, send another part to the medical commission, and there will be enough for the remaining helmets. For the commission, a smart guy will look like a blunt, but a simple person will become witty, because they are pleased to know that he can quickly cope with the situation and will not reach into their pocket at the same time.
I think something like that. Even while the smart one thinks, the fool does. And for every 1,000 unlucky fools, a few will succeed…And the smart ones will just sit there and think.
Let's just say.The more stupid a person is, the smarter they think they are, and they always answer a question, even if they don't know the answer, even if it's not relevant.Further, there is such an interesting word-education.Education does not add intelligence.You can have encyclopedic knowledge without being able to apply it.Therefore, a naturally intelligent person can have enough worldly wisdom to make the right decision or express the right opinion.
People who do not read and do not develop, this is not true, because they are versatile. In practice, i.e. they learn from their mistakes and show their physical side.�
1 Success (apparently, we are talking about financial) depends on understanding the goal, hard work and sociability much more than on the flexibility of the mind and broad horizons that literature develops.�
2 Fiction doesn't improve communication skills.
3 In communication, the integrity of a person and their awareness of themselves in life plays a much greater role than vocabulary and abstract reading. Such a person clearly understands their position and what they are talking about. Even if he is narrow-minded, he may look more confident than a well-read truth seeker, if the latter does not have enough conviction.
4 Reading is different from reading, its benefits depend on the ability to think critically.
Success brings practicality or luck. So highly specialized people who strive for specific heights and do not want to spend time reading books with someone else's thoughts about extraneous things, in a certain (practical) sense, are smarter than lovers of food for the mind. At the same time, a person will be smarter in terms of knowledge of life and self-knowledge if he reads books and feels comfortable with an average salary. His discoveries among the pages and his peace of mind are also a success. Unless, when he is mentally balanced, he will not be concerned about the question of why someone is above him on the social ladder.
That's a great question. And there are also 2 suitable phrases
1-dementia and courage
2-fools are lucky
A smart person will think 100 times, change his mind 100 times, smear all the risks, all -, and all +. And the stupid one will go and do it.
There is always something to say – I think they just do not give an account of the words, do not think about the meaning and importance of them. Due to this, they quickly make a decision in the pronunciation of words.
Those who do not know how to think imagine that they are thinking, and they control the thoughts of those who really think.
Each person has their own experience.
We communicate and work every day.
And usually such people quickly find answers because they have learned to answer so that they are left behind.
Remember your classmates when they did not want to do homework, write, read, draw what reasons they did not find just not to do.
Every day we still learn and find out whether we want it or not.
That's why we are developing this way.
Where the area of ignorance is greater, there is more confidence in your knowledge because there is an illusion that you already know quite a lot. And where there is a lot of knowledge, you realize that you don't know much yet, and hence uncertainty grows.
This is called the Dunning-Kruger effect
Often people have the position “development should have such and such a vector, and all the others are wrong”. But people all have different individual qualities, and their goals and development vectors are correspondingly different. If you follow Your own vector, and not the one that is popular in society and imposed by parents in childhood, then you can achieve your goal. If a person's goal is to “read and develop”, then he will achieve the goal of “reads and develops abstractly” – such as spiritual. And those who set specific, material goals achieve them. For them, “read and develop” perform an auxiliary function – you can do it without it. If a person “reads and develops” in order to understand or create something, then he will find the answer, and understand what he wanted, and create what he dreamed of. This is also an achievement of the goal, but it is “visible” only to this person, because the goal is not material, it was created for his mental reality. And if it is material (to create something), it can be understood and accepted only in a narrow circle. To advance in society with such a creative result, even a high one, is problematic – society needs a trend, not a masterpiece.
We live in the age of Money. It is typical for this era to live without thinking. The main reference point is material well-being. If you think about it, you can miss out on the profit. Reading is a waste of time.
I have never seen a truly successful person who would not be engaged in self-development, unless of course you consider working for your uncle a success and even if by some lucky coincidence, becoming even a top manager, you are limited in your abilities, let's talk at least about dollar millionaires, entrepreneurs, there are such people among my friends, and I can say that they are distinguished from all others by a very high efficiency, 12-14 hours, constant generation of new ideas, tasks, ability to communicate, find and maintain useful contacts, all the time to stay in search of solutions to certain issues, constant study of new information, current data in certain areas, self-development is constantly going on, among those who just worked at work, and did everything as it is, I did not see a single example that a person would get above the middle manager, IMHO
This is a prop. Success is influenced by many factors – and “well-read” is clearly not included in them.
Let's start with the fact that you can read a lot of books, but at the same time not expand your horizons a bit. Because it has no practical application or comparison with the real world (hello, fans of science fiction, horror and Dasha Dontsova), therefore, specifically books in the vast majority, excluding, perhaps, professional literature and nonfiction, can only be used as a source of pleasure (something at the level of watching movies, but there are people who prefer books to cinema).
About “always find something to answer” in general laughter. I assure you, gentlemen, if you read millions of pages of books, view thousands of terabytes of educational content and hundreds of guides at the level of “how to become charismatic” – nothing will change in this regard. To have a suspended tongue, you need to speak. And in principle, everything is decided by practice. let's be honest. And a person who doesn't really read can talk quite well – and thereby MAKE USEFUL ACQUAINTANCES! While sitting at a book you will not start them.
In general, if we draw conclusions, success is achieved by the most arrogant and risky people, as well as citizens with connections and acquaintances, and from different social strata. As you can see, literature and self-development have nothing to do with this. Yes, it is still necessary to develop yourself, but you need to choose a certain vector of development. And” I'll read a little bit in biology, then in programming and business ” nene, gentlemen, will not ride like that.
Because books are the views of a certain person or several people on what these books, articles, or videos are about. That is, you seem to know the world with someone else's mind, and not your own, and consider it development, but there are people who observe real life, without any “I see it that way” and learn from life and reflect on data that is not distorted by someone else's perception, unlike those who read books and get an education, if they talk about the ability to LIVE.
.. among other things..also because that's what it is and stupidity-a free application to an undeveloped / unreadable person-so that the latter can be sure of his indisputable correctness/intelligence and the relevance of “his five kopecks….” distributed, right and left, to almost everyone who meets on his way
Perhaps the answer to your question lies in the following Bible truths:
“Have you ever seen a man who is wise in his eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him…”
Proverbs 26
The prudent is temperate in his words, and the prudent is cold-blooded…”
Proverbs 17
Being able to always answer doesn't mean that the answer is correct, especially if the question itself actually requires knowledge. For example, in the game “What, where, when” questions are usually used, the answers to which can be found by logical judgments. In this case, readability and intellectual level are not so important, you need analytical skills. But there are questions that require knowledge and scientific knowledge, and here even analytical judgments (philosophy) will not help.
In short – a person as a loudspeaker broadcasts what is broadcast in the connected channel, and depending on the channel, the information provided is true or false.
– equally, the listener perceives on the channel that corresponds to his perception, from this understanding of each other or denial.
There are only two extremes: some are very good at formulating questions correctly and answering them correctly. But there are no properly formulated questions in vryalnost, there is only a stupid why and all these people are hung up on this question. Others do not understand why they need education, but also say that they are stupid. For example Enshten was not organized but answered questions that at that time could not exist but today are constantly asked. And if you read his books, you'll get fucked.
I think there is nothing complicated here. People read, reflect on the characters ' actions, and live out a part of the novel with them. Then, on a subconscious level, we copy, or rather put a part of the character into ourselves. And this distracts us from the real, real life. But on the other hand, not all people who are successful have never read anything. Books are knowledge, and knowledge is life. So read on and don't hesitate. By the way, I can recommend one book by a novice author. “A matter of principle” is its name. There is on author today or on liters. There's a lot of discussion about the meaning of your question(albeit indirectly).
they are more “contact”, “companionable” than those who prefer to spend more time reading, alone, hence, over the years of richer continuous diverse communication with different people, they develop resourcefulness despite the fact that they have less knowledge than self-contained “bookworms” – this is due to nature, heredity, living conditions from birth, extroverts strive for communication, are successful in communication, achieve more, because they are more confident in themselves than introverts who prefer to be alone, surrounded by books, knowledge of the latter is wider, but the ability to apply them in difficult life situations requiring an instant reaction is much worse
That's what you think. I once thought about it and came to the conclusion that they are just a little more energetic and take energy away from us faster.
In general, their apparent success = for the time being. Like a shallow well… It will be exhausted once…
Potomochu that these people do not clog up the brain with all sorts of junk.People who don't have their heads full of terms theories laws etc have better vision
There is, of course, a precedent that people who “do not go into their pockets for a word” pay more attention. They climb on the eyes, creating a sense of perspective. But those who pull such people along (this is especially noticeable in a business career) – they themselves turn out to be short-sighted. Just for the reason that among such people – a small percentage of “well-read and developed”.
If you take such a question as an absolute truth, then the ability to quickly find an answer and make a decision accordingly in business is a higher priority than taking a long and painstaking look at the situation and then making a very balanced decision. Mistakes are acceptable in business, as long as they are not fatal. In business, “time” is the equivalent of money. Therefore, the loss of time brings more losses than a non-fatal mistake when making an illiterate, but prompt decision.
As for people who read and develop more and for some reason, at least in the essence of this issue, do not achieve success in business, this is more natural than paradoxical. Such people tend to doubt (in general, doubt is the lot of a thinking person). Consequently, such people are less determined than those who find solutions quickly.
There is another possible answer. Why is it considered that finding a quick solution means always finding the wrong or stupid solution? Very often, long-term thinking does not bring the proper return. The trouble is that when thinking for a long time, a person forces himself to weigh everything, analyze and make a decision taking into account all the pros and cons literally” consciously “and a little detached, while a person who makes a decision quickly relies mainly on his own intuition. Such a person is immersed in a problem (consider it a business), which is called “with the head”. For him, the solution is always on the surface. It is in his subconscious, so the decision is made quickly. More often, such decisions are more successful in business than deliberate “from head to toe”.
A small remark. In my answers, business refers to business related to trade, services, and so on. Business in the field of heavy industry, metallurgy, etc. simply requires balanced collective decisions. Intuition alone can't achieve anything in this business. But by the way, as a rule, this business is run by thinking people who have the ability to quickly make decisions and they do not fit into the format of this issue.
Because such people live more in practice than in theory! And they know for themselves what exists. But there are exceptions to the rule. As they say, study all your life and die a fool.
This question seems to be about some kind of injustice of the world, where one tries and gets nothing, and the second does not try and has everything.
A woman may also ask: why do I take care of my husband, but he does not love me, and her husband carries her neighbor Nina in his arms, although she does…. so-and-so…
Or an employee of a company who works hard may wonder why they are being promoted not by him, but by a careless, less experienced colleague
We can find every day in the world some kind of injustice, wrongness. Because the world is what people make it. And people are all different.
The question is, where do we choose to spend our energy when faced with such things? Outrage? A grudge? Anger? Or to build your own line of living as efficiently as possible in reality?
You can't do two things at the same time: resent life and improve your life. You have to choose one thing.
What do you choose?
Those who achieve success in society usually have a well-developed emotional intelligence. And they understand society better than others, and most importantly, they know how to WORK for this very society.
The problem of those who “who read and develop” is usually that they do it not in order to do something useful for society, but for … for other purposes.
Because most of the earth (about 85%) is idiots, because the world lives in HYPE, not benefit. And an idiot better understands what kind of hype another idiot needs. Hence the low demand for intelligence.
And then they send their children to the best schools and universities in the world. Not everywhere the value of education is absent. In other countries, you can also use your brain to fight your way through.
Now self-development is considered even if you have read one book on psychology. The question is where to apply the acquired knowledge later, and whether you apply it at all.
If you read a lot of books by famous psychologists, then graduated from the institute, opened your own office-this is one thing, properly applied self-development.
Another thing that is very popular now is that a woman has completed bakers ' courses, gift wrapping courses, plus she has passed a lot of trainings “How to become a millionaire's wife and a businesswoman” and is sitting bragging about it on forums that she has self-development. And does nothing to make it all bring her a profit.
Or sitting around giving out smart advice and wasting time ( like me^^).
A well-designed strategy for applying knowledge is very important.
I've been wanting to try gift wrapping for a long time…
Because such people develop in their own practical narrow field. They respond to the situation simply, without unnecessary reasoning, and often this reaction contributes to success.
Because you need to decide on the goal,if you set yourself the task of material success-you don't need to know Socrates.If your ambitions are political or something related to your social position, then you already need to work hard in this regard.Although we must not forget that many well-known thinkers then experienced contradictions-greedily self-educating then in every possible way reviled and cursed this craving,while not ceasing to learn.There is a well-known saying here-live for a century, learn for a century, and you will die a fool.The same don't forget that”…knowledge is arrogant”(biblical, but true-we usually see experts as arrogant and proud of their knowledge)
Less intelligent people are able to push, walk on the head of those who prevent them from achieving their goals. They just gag everyone around them, get ahead of them. They also have a high level of socialization skills, they know how to beat everything in a certain situation
In general, the question is posed incorrectly. Why is it that people who don't read books succeed and people who don't? Superficial reasoning after a couple of stories about Vaska from the village, who achieved success? Yes, in society they like to popularize one story, usually about a similar (undeveloped) person and draw conclusions by generalizing. The truth is almost never told about those many self-confident people who started doing something without having theoretical training, failed in their business and lost everything.
Because the human nervous system is designed in such a way that learning through work, through hands, is more effective than reading. There are nerves in the hands. And if you stimulate them, these nerves stimulate the brain, and it develops (in this direction)
Because they have plenty of time to read all sorts of articles on the Internet from scientific to “your mother is a lama” and sofa criticism ( I judge by myself)
I can't say anything about success, hahaha
An excess of “logical” information clogs up the “intuitive” channels of receiving information. That is why less well-read people achieve more in life, compared to “intellectuals”.
It's very simple: people wait until the books they've read work and all their wishlist suddenly comes to fruition. Unfortunately, this is only the case with business coaches who tell you about it in their “terribly expensive but useful” training sessions.
For some reason, everyone forgets that one desire and two books read is not enough to achieve all the goals set. But you can start there, of course.
But those who often achieve their goals faster and without books(and with them, too), just DO. They try, implement, are inspired by these books and act, not wait. They work, they apply their knowledge. And they know why they are reading this or that book, and what it will give them.
Everywhere they write that all successful people read books. Yes, I'm pretty sure it is. But you should understand in what order this happens: first people do something, then questions arise – they look for answers(including in books), then they become more successful in what they do, and again they look for information on how to do even more and better.
I've never heard a success story in which a person first read 50 books on self-development and immediately after that became successful, earned a lot of money and now does not need anything.
In general, hope for books, but do not be bad yourself!
“It's better to see it once than hear it a hundred times.” For us, what we see with our own eyes is more instructive. The average person, stewing in a common cauldron of the middle class, directly observing the entire palette of life situations, knows more about life than a university professor or monk. Don't describe it like an apple, but understanding comes from eating it. But the truth, as always, is somewhere in the middle — it's smarter to live without breaking away from reality and read, read, read. My opinion.
They don't read, so they don't develop. Logic at the first-grader level. Who taught you that reading is always about development? In general, what is self-development? It's about improving yourself and your skills. How does this relate to reading? Why does a reading person become smart a priori? Let's say that while reading, you understand and learn something new for yourself. But what makes you different from* profession * Uncle Vasya, who has learned how to do *subject* and already has established views on some things?
It is in fairy-tale movies that Cinderellas and fools achieve everything. And in life, you often need to move the convolutions to learn new things and hone what you know and can do. In addition, to get results, knowledge must correspond to the goals and objectives set.
Because someone spends time reading other people's thoughts and reflecting, and someone lives in the real world, does business, achieves something and gets skills directly, and not useless theory.
It's pretty simple here. Based on the common sense and experience of already successful entrepreneurs, people can be divided into 2 types: learning and doing. The former can read 1,000 books in a year, but never put them into practice. And they will also get doubts from an overabundance of information (but this does not mean that you do not need to read). And the type of doer is those who do, make mistakes, make mistakes, and so on in a circle. And often this is faster than delving into the material with your head.
Non-reader is not equally stupid!
The reader is not equally smart!
The concept of mind is subjective. Everyone evaluates the degree of education relative to their knowledge. Therefore, adults often seem smart to the child, because they know what the child does not know.
While confused people make their way through the endless jungle of evaluation, analysis, reading and thinking, active and irrepressible people of action live a jumping tooth-crushing life full of mistakes, dangers, risks, twists and turns, and therefore receive faster feedback from the world. That is, their experience and understanding of how to act gets richer faster. And layering the habit of acting on understanding how to act, they get even faster results. This is if, of course, we are talking about people with goals, because it is pointless that developing action, that inaction equally lead not to what is consciously chosen. By the way, nothing is specified about goals in the question, and it is goals that are clear, clear and tangible that are the basis for understanding how best to move towards them. People of reading and self-development are people of search, as a rule. And while some are just looking for how to do it without doing it, others just go and do it. If they manage to read and develop additionally in addition to this, then they have no equal. There are no separate camps of these two positions and it is not entirely appropriate to oppose them to each other.
Well, here they talk mainly about the everyday mind – reason; at best-about intelligence and its components (in particular, erudition).
But if we are talking about an intelligent person, then we should probably include such concepts as culture and moral values, which, unfortunately, a large number of so-called people have completely forgotten, simply turning into animals without it.
Because it is proved that intelligence in its infancy exists in higher animals, as well as erudition, when a number of individuals in a pack show higher abilities for rapid learning and, accordingly, a wider range of knowledge in different situations compared to their own (which, by and large, is included in the concept of erudition).
knowledge resides in minds filled with other people's thoughts, wisdom in minds that are attentive to their own
This is eastern wisdom, I think you got the answer
I don't know, probably because they're overconfident. And a smart person always doubts.
I'm talking about the ability to argue. And those who know a lot and read a lot just have a simpler attitude to life and do not run for material goods, probably so.
This is simply due to the self-confidence of reading people. They think that after reading the next collection of letters on paper, they will become smarter. And don't blame them for that. Such a direct connection was formed at the beginning of human history. For example, even now, many tribes drink the blood of strong animals to become stronger, fast ones to become faster.
But this logic sooner or later leads to the need to eat Wasserman)))
Because the environment shapes behavior. Each of us has different genes, life experience and upbringing.
You'll look at another “non-reader” – it sticks out in the phone all the time. And “toothy”)) So he does not scroll through the VK feed on his phone, but plays in the application for logic tasks, there are different pictures with letters and numbers and questions for ingenuity. Here he trains logic and ingenuity. So he always knows what to say.
Although it does not read and does not develop like.
To begin with, achieving something does not mean being smart, but rather purposeful, you need to understand what books can give you and besides books are different, I would divide them into 2 classes books where you just get information for example on legal or political science or scientific where you need experience from real life and imagination to understand phenomena, I would say that books or something else will not make you successful because it is not related, here you need a little science, neuroscience and psychology, suppose that the brain means development is the ability to solve tasks, the ability to adapt to the environment, if you drop these are just a few sostovyalyuschie memory, attention, and thinking in fact, these are the three main factors bringing them to the limit ideally, you will become smarter and development ie the brain will work more efficiently, but career success for example is not associated with the brain for example, as examples of knowledge or experience, then it also affects what is meant by success if people who are engaged in the production of central processors, they will earn normally but at the same time developed, there are on the contrary just bankers, specify in the question what exactly lies under this word, now let's try to classify what it means to develop a person as an individual at the redistribution, this is a lot of experience from various fields, understanding of fundamental laws, ingenuity in situations, developed logic induction, deduction, having all this, you still do not have the fact that you will become successful, success is rather a successful situation and purposefulness, it is generally difficult to answer because the question is not correct and is asked from different concepts and in an affirmative context. Summing up we can say that success is sometimes the opposite in meaning to success because success implies a goal well take any thinkers or mathematicians for some life is meaningless for others it is a world of laws in fact the limit of human development is just the same and is the awareness of your insignificance in the world and that the meaning of life, in other cases, success is due to the fact that you are either a good specialist in some field or earned on what others missed at the right time, in short, for simplification, if a person has a low level of intelligence or mind if we take this as a single criterion, then people with low intelligence do not see success are usually unemployed and do not see the meaning of life, the average level of intelligence and slightly above average on the contrary usually achieve everything and become successful and then a paradox happens people with high intelligence also >
Many people are born with certain skills and qualities that help them deftly get out of difficult situations and achieve certain success in life.
For example, these qualities include empathy or intuition.
At the same time, if you study different techniques and techniques of persuasion and strategies for profitable relationships, such people can always be outplayed not at the expense of natural qualities, but at the expense of knowledge.
If you are interested in the topic of effective communication, I invite you to get acquainted withAn encyclopediaNegotiations
I once watched a TV program with the participation of Zhvanetsky, who is not unknown in certain circles of intellectuals. I do not want to evaluate his work here,because I have always been alien to his verbal balancing act. I read hard myself. Often in the course of reading, I reread what I read, trying to catch the author's thought ,and having caught it, I think about it . I keep reading ,and after a few pages I read something again. I like this kind of reading,I like to have this invisible dialogue with the author of the work . And Zhvanetsky, probably, is not the writer with whom the reader discusses. You accept it completely or do not accept it at all, and it is impossible to catch a certain ,well-established idea here .His words fly like colored balloons over the hands of a juggler-try to understand, grasp something specific. Or maybe something else,maybe I'm not as sophisticated and intelligent as Zhvanetsky's main audience, which consists entirely of former employees of former research institutes . Yes, and Zhvanetsky himself is in many ways already “former” He once said with sadness: “We are not rich with you” He threw this phrase into the audience, standing, as usual on the stage. Then he took the same stack of papers out of the same doctor's bag and began his usual speech. What was unusual and unusual here was that Zhvanetsky was not able to light the hall. There was no previous interaction between the speaker and the audience. I watched and thought then:but the time of all these hundreds of people sitting in the hall has already passed. On the other side of the screen were the faces of employees of scientific and educational institutions of the Brezhnev era, about them, well-read and developed people, the speaker said, as about people who did not get rich ,that is,they remained on their meager salaries ,or even lost even these pennies . Zhvanetsky knew who came to his performances and who was currently sitting in the audience. They were representatives of a whole stratum of intellectuals,who in the three or four years of perestroika turned into real marginals .
Why did these bright heads ,these carriers of knowledge, instantly turn into people who are not needed by society ? The answer is simple: society has changed.
Yesterday's researcher, with his cult of knowledge and decency, cannot go to requesters today,and tomorrow buy a place in the State Duma with blood money. Nor can he invent criminal schemes for robbing his own people, such as universal vouchers. Well-readness, development, culture obliges a person to comply with many requirements.
the inhibitions that have formed in his head. You can't do many things like that-you can't steal ,you can't kill, you can't beat a woman ,you can't get angry .betray and so on, and so on
And do you wonder then that the people who once made up Zhvanetsky's audience have not achieved anything in their lives? Are you surprised that our unscrupulous society doesn't need these candidates and doctors of sciences?
.
Because they are sitting on their phones and can know more details, they can be the first to see videos about the coronavirus, for example, or some other information.
A person who reads books, develops, is quite typical to experience a rethinking of values. Over time, the difference in these values may lead to a reluctance to engage in discussions with other subjects, as well as, accordingly, to “lead” or “find” answers. A similar, even more frequent situation and with an intellectual difference – a complete lack of interest in dialogue with people who are stupid, in your opinion, people. But, to put it mildly, this is superficial nonsense.�
You can read as many books as you want, but this does not mean that you will develop intellectually or otherwise. And even if you do, there is no confidence in the development that is not useless in relation to the society in which you are located. How much use will it be to study Picasso's Guernica if you find yourself in a national socialist society that perfectly preserves the ideas of the Third Reich, where this is considered degenerate art?
And what is development? It's not easy to say for sure, just like a person who doesn't read books,but has achieved success. These concepts are completely dependent on time and place (like any other, probably). You should not take books as a way of development. As a leisure activity, yes. As a way of personal, individual growth-maybe. But the development here is less, because you can't even say firmly what it is.
More practical experience, because it is impossible to learn everything from theory. It's one thing to read “How to Make Friends” by Dale Kornegie, but it's completely different to be in the company of strangers and try to win their attention and love for your person in practice. Practice my friend practice!
Because the assembled simple cheap motor, wrapped in electrical tape, will go further than the designed space mover on paper.
but it is still better to calculate the total median earnings of a limited person and an educated person for 30 years. then we will see the real picture.
I think that for some people it is not necessary to read books in order to be smart and achieve their goal.this question is very objective, not everyone who does not develop, everything is super. but just the opposite
all nada life is some kind of development
you can even develop while lying on the bed
I think this is a strange question
By the word “life” you mean the life of modern society,the benefits it bestows, and its “laws”.And this is not the whole Life).I think a lot of examples are easy to find
Hello, author. The answer to this question is actually simple. It depends on what they read and how they develop those who have not achieved anything in life…
Those who do not develop and do not read anything are more likely to like actions than words. You can be well-read, but do not apply your acquired knowledge in practice, considering yourself so highly developed. Fortunately, and perhaps even unfortunately, people have not learned to move things with the power of thought. In this regard, all their knowledge remains at the level of esotericism. If our intentions are not supported by anything other than desire and emotional impulse, then you will not get far on enthusiasm alone. There is a fine line between theory and practice, where in reality, when comparing them, they often do not coincide, and this is normal.
Unfortunately, I believe that these are misconceptions of the “era of troechnikov”, which we now have. This era assumes that a C-student who has taken a position as a manager and has achieved something is quickly and not on business ready to provide advice and help in his position, because it was at school, in the absence of knowledge, that the C-student had to answer at least something to the teacher's question. This particular skill is currently trending. As a result, we have unprofessional young and not very managers – tyapkin – lyapkin. The worst thing is that we are entering the era of “losers” , but this is a completely different story.
Such people do not have the opportunity to rely on the experience of generations, they simply do not know about it! Accordingly, they do not experience the problem of blindness associated with unnecessary knowledge and unnecessary prohibitions. Their guide to action is only “I want”, “I need”, “I like/dislike”. The fact that such illiterate representatives of society achieve a lot is a pure myth. Very much by its own standards – yes, by universal standards-of course not! Yes, the collapse of achievements can be delayed for one simple reason – there are already a lot of people who do not seek to develop, they have formed a certain community, i.e. each of them in their own environment.
Indeed, people who may not have 10 higher educations each achieve a lot, but they are well versed in the field of their interest and read a LOT, as well as learn from experience by other means.
What do you think “achieve more in life”? Once you answer this question, you will understand what you want. But for you, these are taboos, prohibitions… so allow it to yourself. But if you are a well-read, educated person who has turned on a lot of filters from books, prohibitions, and laws in your brain… How can you afford it? You will have to deal with a lot of complexes… And sometimes these desires of yours cost someone their life…; -) Well, what do not well-read, not educated people achieve? Money, career, apartment, car? Is that what you're talking about?
To begin with, it sounds like a stereotype that is not particularly confirmed. Then, the reading is different. Facebook posts can also be taken for reading, and it can also develop certain talents in us. This can include, for example, developing empathy and social skills. In the end, there is no single idea of what development is, and it is also not uniform. And it is not always connected with reading. However, if you still answer according to the given parameters, then it would be good to refer to the widespread hypothesis that” readers ” lack social skills, are poorly adapted, cannot break the rules when necessary, have less practical experience and therefore often do not know how to behave outside the world of reading/studying. This also applies to the eternal question of why C-students do better by conventional standards, or why unpopular kids at school become more successful than high school stars. There are a lot of nuances here, but in general the answer is this.
As for self-development, why should a person who is already doing well develop himself? Practitioners of self-development are interested in those people who have something that does not work out or does not work out at all, and they are trying to understand why, to change themselves.
I think that there are no non-reading people.All people are in society and they need to read at least basic ads.This question does not include the topic of reading books – the author's gap. And the people who achieve in life are those who know how to think, and the ability to think is instilled not only with the help of books,but most likely with the help of life experience. And life experience is made up of situations that are sometimes not very favorable.
because their brains work differently. For excellent students, it works like completing tasks and other people's installations. They were born to do it. And as for the twos and threes, they are always used to getting out of it. Write it off somewhere, negotiate with someone. And they have developed completely different skills than the excellent students. skills that help them advance and survive through life.
Well, the will of luck can work here) Perhaps these people are more talkative and have wider connections than you, who read and develop more than you do
I believe that they take it with cunning and impudence, and they have no intelligence or only rudiments. It's like the Gypsies, who can't all read, but live well.
The question is twofold.
On the one hand, the well-known phrase “Being in the right place at the right time”comes to mind.
A person's success can depend on many factors. Yes, and learning, knowledge of the world, occurs in different ways.
Someone reads a lot of theory, but does not go to practice. And some, on the contrary, do not study theory, but prefer to study “on the ground”.
In my opinion, a person who has become successful, but does not read and does not engage in self-development. There are reasons for that:
1) A person has a common connection in which he can easily get a job with a higher paid salary for blatu.
2) The person was in the right place, at the right time.
3) The person is fully dedicated to work. Obviously, the employer will pay more for those who benefit in the collective and will always appear on the spot if necessary.
4) Delusional products, the first necessary things, etc. �For example, due to the coronavirus, the demand for medical masks and antiseptic is becoming more and more.
There are two types of people – theorists and practitioners)
So theorists only read and learn new things. Practitioners take actions and learn from their mistakes.
Have you ever noticed that children always “know” the answers to all the questions? When you ask them a question, they immediately begin to answer(invent an answer) and then believe in it themselves. It's the same situation here, the more a person knows, the more he doubts, the more he understands that he doesn't know anything. The one who doesn't know (thinks he knows) has almost no doubts (like a child) and answers confidently, and this attracts more supporters to his side. And we should not forget about the intellectual minority. That is, most people will follow the one who answers the question more confidently, and not more reasoned. An example is the first video debate in the United States between Kennedy and Nixon, when Kennedy scored more votes in the result due to the fact that he was more confident. And Nixon won the radio debate, so people pay more attention to nonverbal characteristics than to the logic of your arguments.
That's not true, I can tell you because I read it. So on the contrary, those who have not read, as a rule, cannot connect two words. Because speech is formed from reading. And if you don't read anything you get ellochki ogres
And this is a question from the category:” I'm starting to envy the slaves – they have strong beliefs ” (“Kill the dragon”) Everything is clear to them. Everything is simple. Binary. Black and white. Without shades. They're boring.
Good question actually. 1. What do you mean by ” find something to say?” Now it doesn't matter what the person answers, the main thing is to have a confident look and shout louder(tactics of the bazaar aunt). While the thinking person is thinking about how to express the idea more precisely and clearly, the impudent stupen cuts a tinned throat. The result is predictable. 2. It is necessary to clarify the criteria for this “more”. I have a lot of friends who live much better financially, but an interesting moment, watching them, I don't see much happiness on their faces. Well, folk wisdom says, “there are no pockets in the coffin”
People who do not develop and do not read actually do not always know what to answer, because they are constrained by their own lack of education. And even if they get a rude answer (which usually doesn't carry a semantic load), you can always give a counterargument or not react)
If a statistical survey was conducted, and if so, how the results were recorded. From the point of view of the lower spheres of existence, it is indeed possible to judge success if you have taken a larger piece of meat in a pack of your own kind, but these spheres are not fundamental in assessing success in the human environment. Let's recall matimatik Perelman, who refused a million dollars in remuneration. One more time. The amount of money is not a criterion for a person's success. Jesus spoke . It is easier for a camel to enter the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. And I can answer why this is so personally.
It seems to me that there is more that the non-reader answers what others want, and the well-read one has his own opinion and principles that are not violated, for example, unlike the non-read one.
But correction, what makes you think that those who read and develop themselves are really smart and much more reasonable than those who do not read and do not develop ostensibly?
Because they are already so well-read and developed that they are called overqualified and it is difficult for them to find suitable colleagues and employees in the ecosystem that currently exists, for example, in Moscow. These are people who were educated before ' 97, when the school reform began. They took 7 compulsory final exams at school, not by choice. They did not have too early “specialization” in general education subjects.
They are well-read (according to a certain system) since school, and developed since childhood, in the sense that they have developed the skills to learn, learn about the world and themselves.
How do I develop these skills? Graduate students are always taught the history of philosophy, and the crown of the creation of philosophical thought today is Kant's epistemology – the science of knowledge, he gave this science the author's name “critique of pure reason”. It is useful for everyone to read at least the preface to the 2nd edition of Kant's book of the same name.
There he writes that he wants to leave a legacy to humanity of the culture of reason.
What is mind culture? This is the ability, the skill to use your natural program, speaking in modern language. What natural tools do we have for this? Logic (the study of which led to the creation of a separate science of the same name).
Read the textbook of Starchenko, MSU.
These are a priori forms of sensory perception-space, time, God (reason), without which thinking is impossible. This is the analysis (dissection) of concepts. To learn how to analyze concepts, you need to learn your native language. This is an a priori synthesis based on analytics (with the addition of visual representations). An example of pure synthetic science is mathematics. All concepts of mathematics are synthetic a priori, and there is nothing in nature that corresponds to them. To synthesize a priori synthetic concepts from the data of concept analysis, you need to use visual representations. The geometry helps you do this. Unity of apperception – the ability to study oneself objectively.
A priori concepts – “law”. A posteriori concepts – “body”.
Moral law (knowledge is the result of a moral, non-speculative application of reason). Actually, the mind and simple human reason, which easily breaks dogmatism and prejudice when faced with them in life. The culture of reason begins with the ability to choose in all the variety of objects of experience that the knowledge of which is to a certain extent possible and necessary, so that, as Kant writes, not to speculate about things about which no one knows or learns anything, which is so characteristic of inquisitive youth, for example, we do not know what freedom is from a scientific point of view, but Philodoxia (love of wisdom), he calls the main reason for the possible death of mankind. How does philodoxia differ from epistemological philosophy? Epistemology is a science – a system of synthetic judgments in their hierarchy, at the top of which are principles and ideals.
All sciences have branched off from philosophy.
Therefore, in order not to perish and even flourish, that is, to be successful as a species, you need to engage in solid science, says Kant.
See who is successful in a big business. These are people who have seriously studied various sciences.
The question is not very generalized. But in my experience, the more extreme life is, the better the adaptation. Psychologists say that people who play sports, build a career faster. Or people who were beaten every day in their childhood and have a special psyche, then this person will also find something to say. I said all this based on my life.
I believe because they have a lot of free time and can achieve their goals. But those who read and develop will not say that they will live badly 😅
Well, to begin with, not always.
It is not very often that people who do not develop achieve something worthwhile. You can simply develop not only by reading books, but also by practicing in an interesting field, spending a lot of time at work.(for example, you can hardly become a successful artist by reading manuals on drawing and painting, but visiting exhibitions, participating in them, and making your way to people through hard work-quite). And in general, I do not understand this cult of reading, from all sides everyone says that you need to read so many books a month that it will certainly make you smart. My former history teacher called me stupid because I hadn't read any nonfiction books about weapons used in the Second World War. And this, I'm sorry, is kind of stupid. I believe that it is necessary to read, not because they say so, not because you need to cross the limit of 30 books in a year, but because reading can relax, interest you in some facts or stories, occupy you during some trip, and if you don't like to read, then you shouldn't force yourself to do it, just because you will be considered stupid. Of course, reading develops memory, vocabulary, improves concentration ( all this, by the way, can be developed in other ways). It will not give you a full-fledged experience in the field of your work, this is just a theory, and the fact that you have read a book about assembling a rocket does not give you the ability, even if you have the resources, to assemble it.
While some people are shouting at all social networks that they are already reading the hundredth book on self-development, others are learning by trial and error how to build a successful career/how to find an approach to people/how to go public, etc.
You are so funny of course))))) they read and develop themselves))
One awesome person taught me things.
“There are two” aha ” moments in Olympiad mathematics. The first is when you solved the problem yourself. The second is when you were tormented, tormented, you were told the decision and you were like ” aha, cool!”
In the second case, you didn't get any smarter. No self-development.
And this lesson is one of the few that I am ready to summarize.
Because some people are born with a flash drive ))Yes, yes)They are also full of creativity and radiate inner strength, and often such people have a “well-developed” imagination ! )I say this not from the lantern, but from myself I know))Rather, not by myself, but by a relative alone 🙂
People understand the very concept of success in different ways: for some, it is just material success, while others see other goals and meanings of life for themselves. The more such goals there are, the more variables there are in the system of equations, and the more difficult it is to solve them. If one person makes up a simple equation for himself and solves it, then he is successful. Here you can look at dudes with golden palaces, expensive cars and women who simply do not have enough imagination to want something more than all this. At the same time, erudite and versatile people often lack the ability to concentrate on their goals, and they choose more complex paths that are easier to get lost in. But those of them who manage to solve their own system of equations not only make a lot of money, but also change this world for the better.
Because they don't waste their time on entertaining things like books, and they don't indulge their ego with attempts at abstract “self-development.” What kind of self-development can there be without specifying details and minimal specifics? There is a feeling that people have outplayed the rpg and imagine life as a set of lvl. And from quests experience, and from monsters, and from regular visits to the game. But no, life will not merge everything into one piggy bank, and no general personal self-development is expected.
“Intellectuality and high spirituality are revealed [precisely revealed, not increased] through the production of cultural and intellectual values. Through production, not consumption … There is no mention in history of any great gallery-goer, honored book reader, or movie-goer … You've read Shakespeare, yes, well done, but anyone can do it. Now, if you had written a play yourself, like Shakespeare, that would be a different conversation.”a sobering article, read it if you don't know what words to motivate your friends to break away from self-love and books
Returning to the question, most likely, these people just have some qualities and skills (social, I'm almost sure) that the honored readers of books did not consider significant, and therefore they win at once.
Because reading,by and large, does nothing. And how do you imagine it ?! did you read Crime and Punishment and become all developed? No, it won't work that way!
I read just to train my brain (helps with memorization), to see the author's point of view (Various writers like Kafka, Orwell) well, just when it's interesting (Dante – The Divine Comedy) The latter, I advise everyone, too deep meaning is hidden in it.
Because they do not have attitudes, stereotypes, how to do it right! They go and do. You can read and develop a lot, but when you sit on the couch with your knowledge and do nothing, you will not succeed). Ideally, you need to read, develop and do! While the child is learning to walk, he falls a lot. And adults are afraid to fall.
That people are born 08, 18,28/09,19,29/10,20,30 each month, where =the second sign: 8 or 9 types =intuition= (soft or hard). i.e. “to be different/different” ; 08+09 => 10 (combination of two large properties/resourceful(“slippery”:as in wrestling)///18+19=>20(a combination of two “specific” properties /clarifying and teasing”with your own opinion” /// 28+29=>> 30 (combination of two “detailed” properties/steps – lazy people(due to a lot of = details= events: they don't like being rushed) All people =intuitions=, unconsciously are “servants” of the lady of INTUITION, who does not tolerate when someone from people / especially” not of this world ” (05,15,25, May)/calls themselves” god ” or show =her= “their opinion”/ = she = increases the % rate for helping a person (regardless of their health or success), and then life ends /or authority disappears/…
Good afternoon! Everything is very simple ,These people have their own view and their own opinion, not burdened with any standards, opinions, thoughts of great people, analytical materials, results of scientific achievements, etc. But this can only be handled by sufficiently educated and naturally intelligent people.Unfortunately, such people are not always around.
A great delusion. Primitivism breeds primitivism. I'll give you my own example. I read a lot and I like it. Reading various literature helped me review many things. I studied the real estate industry, the stock market, and over the years went to my goal. Which one? The accumulation of capital has helped me become truly financially independent. Now I'm working on what I love, not on a damn job. I don't get up at 6 o'clock, but at 8-9. As you can see, I also have something to say.
Because a primitive person is always sure that he is right, and an educated, intelligent person always doubts, because there is no truth. He will say, ” I think so.” And would.lo is sure that his opinion is the only one, and anyone who does not agree will be suppressed.
To begin with, this is almost impossible. If you read , you simultaneously improve your spelling and improve your vocabulary.
And at the expense of those people who did not read and did not develop – there are only a few such cases, and here luck plays a role. Just about those who got drunk – do not tell.
Let's look at examples of successful people. At the same time, success, judging by your question, meant only wealth. Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Jack Ma. If we take historical examples and politicians, even in our country – Lenin, Stalin. Which of the following “do not read and do not develop”? And now let's look at examples of people who have not achieved success. Street bums. I've never seen them read anything more complicated than labels for ethanol-containing liquids.
Because they are not so hard on themselves and their conscience. While we are looking for ourselves, trying to understand the structure of the world, to get into the depths of our subconscious, others simply live and achieve their goals in the here and now.
Because people who read, they tend to reason, they still have doubts. And those who do not read, they have everything going in a straight line, they are ready to talk and talk.
I think it's because they're biorobots. On Earth, there are 80-90 percent of them. This is an extra in a play called: THE WHOLE WORLD is A THEATER. I have such a channel on Yandex Zen. ☺
Because on the 1st place they put material, not mental viability, so if you look at it from this “angle”, then yes, they achieve more, they have a limited amount of data in their head to operate with, so the answers come so quickly, and a person who is constantly trying to improve himself will go through a thousand options in his head until he finds the most suitable one
A great excuse for a loser, in which there is neither logic nor facts. Nothing at all, except the desire to spare your ego as a loser. But such a developed reader. Not your own questions?
Because they have a minimal choice for the answer and do not need to think about the answer options. I had a friend at the Institute who charmed girls with a story about a Picasso painting: a girl on a balloon. Although he didn't care about painting or Picassos. I just saw it on the cover of a magazine and started using it like a worm on
a quack
It's simple enough. There is no universal formula, just a goal determined by motivation. People who, in your opinion, do not read and do not develop, are actually very attentive and easy to learn. It's just that you are used to reading and studying everything when you encounter difficulties, just like in Smurfikakh , and they just learn from the mistakes of others and observe all situations well.
I don't think that's true. In our world, a person who does not develop will not be able to achieve much. Everything changes too fast, and you can't get very far without self-development.
Where did you get this from?
Who does not read, does not develop, sticks to the TV and smartphone, does not achieve anything in life.
Answer, yes, it can, but all sorts of garbage, to be honest.
Really interesting. I've seen sharp-tongued people more than once. Their answers are simple and their questions are smart. Secondary education. Innate wisdom? Or life experience?
These are not people , they are parasites that live off of you.In nature, not only “people”, but also plants, animals( this is the meaning of their lives), birds, fish, and half the world of such.Study nature and the world around you and you will understand and understand and not be surprised.Good luck and peace of mind to you!
because stupid people are not afraid of anything, because they do not know how to think about what the consequences will be after this action. But a smart person will think about many scenarios of the consequences of this action, and therefore smart people do not take any risks, because they know that they will get into a mess
What do you mean by “getting more done” ? Buying a Porsche Cayenne ? Protecting the local market ? If this is the case, then of course, the CMC in boxing has an advantage over the philologist . Another question is that someday the system will change and Al Capone will go for life, and the scientist will start paying a decent salary plus royalties for books and scientific works . Those who rummage in computers and now can leave and earn good money . Well, the bonus is aesthetic pleasure with a sense of awareness of your own usefulness and harmony with the world .
About those who “Always find something to answer” – this is not necessarily a sign of intelligence, wisdom or success. This is a sign of social adaptability to some extent.
About those who “read a lot”
It depends on what is meant by the word “developing”. By reading only books, you can develop in terms of reading books, absorbing information, and even learn some analysis by imitating the writer of what you read. But in this case, the person is called “smart”. It's just a storehouse of knowledge, a library. But this does not mean that it benefits anyone.
What matters is not how much you know, but what quality of knowledge you have, and whether it is applicable they are, and if applicable, whether for good.
Wisdom surpasses “smartness” in that wisdom is the ability to apply knowledge in life with love – that is, for the benefit of yourself and people.
Example. A smart person can create a nuclear bomb. A wise man would never do that, even though he could.
Because success is first of all determination and energy. A quick mind can help. But knowledge sometimes leads to reflection or a dogmatic attitude to circumstances, and this is a road to nowhere. Tested over a long lifetime.
It's not a question of whether a person reads or not. A person may not read, but watch video courses, for example, or he may have a large environment with which he can talk on duty. Thus, in the process of communication, a person receives information, processes it, and gives out something of their own. Reading books is not the only way to gain information and knowledge.
And the fact that such people sometimes achieve more is not because they don't read. This is because they use the information they receive actively in their lives. And people who read a lot are mostly reserved people who accumulate knowledge in their heads. They make a lot of money, save it up, but don't use it in practice. The library person. There is a lot of knowledge, but just like the library, it stands still in peace.
Because the one who does not spend time studying, learns to be cunning, notice little things and dodge. He knows how to negotiate with those who know everything. They will help him and let him write it off. These are the qualities that a successful businessman needs. That is why the Federal State Educational Standard was introduced in schools. But I do not agree that those who read and study are unsuccessful. Qualified and knowledgeable specialists are always at a premium.
Because such people do not think, but feel – and this is more correct from the point of view of human development. The mind (intelligence) deprives the senses and the truth. It is fashionable here: to be active, travel, have a prestigious job, a beautiful house, a pumped-up figure, and go to the doctor to analyze your tests (often just like that). It is also fashionable for us to be smart, to know a lot even what is not necessary. Get carried away with something until you're blue in the face and think it's good for yourself and society. All this is far from spirituality, which in our time is not at all in fashion. People are now ruled by the spirit of materialism, to my great regret. And they have corresponding values.
The author wants to beat faces for reading books on self-development. I am sure that you, the author, are a weakling and in life you will not answer a fly to an insult. I would advise you not to throw such big words around. After all, what measure you measure, this will be measured to you. If you want violence, you can wait. A provocateur.
They have personal experience. They have a passion or love for some activity. And those who read live other people's lives. In fact, the only question is whose life do you live? Your own or someone else's. Those who achieve without exception live their lives in a high, or in happiness. You don't have time for someone else's life, believe me.
ahahahph, why are reading and self-development related in this issue in this way?�
kamon, in the yard of the 21st century. You can develop yourself in different ways. You don't have to read it. And reading doesn't necessarily lead to self-development. You can read different books. And I am sure that not all books will help you in self-development.
In most cases, those who say they like to read are just showing off(based on my experience). although at the same time they can read all sorts of nonsense.�
By the way, it is also very interesting why many people, mainly those who are so closely connected with reading no matter what and self-development, hate comics?( I don't really like comics, but still, for the sake of justice) Comics can also help in self-development. They often raise quite serious life problems, as well as problems of moral choice, problems of morality. Why can't it help your self-development?�
Just like movies and cartoons. Yes, and the video on YT. Scientific articles. All this can help in self-development. The main thing is to be able to filter information.
Because “don't read” is not equal to” don't develop”, and” read “is not equal to”develop”. Your cause-and-effect chain isn't quite right, so you can't even get the right answer.
You can see a lot of examples in real life. A friend of my mother's read, I think, only at school and at the institute – and then only according to the program. But she actively communicated with people, learned about life in practice and experience, broke off several times, and what didn't kill her made her stronger. Now she has a big business. But many book lovers with unique theoretical knowledge remain theorists and then work for people like my mother's friend. Because they do not know how to deal with reality – there is no experience and a grated skin that would withstand stress and trials. And in books (as well as in the greenhouse-game conditions of trainings), all this is not worked out.
Development is an ambiguous thing. If a person reads a lot, he develops as a reader and a carrier of knowledge on various topics. As an entrepreneur, he does not develop at the same time. But a person who is engaged in entrepreneurship develops as an entrepreneur.
Because there are a lot of smart people who think that they are better than others because they read a lot or develop. And other people just act, fill bumps learn from their mistakes but act, they have no time to read go to courses they know what they need they have a goal, the goal is not to develop for the sake of development but for the sake of the result. Books, courses, and so on are theory, but you need practice.
Life doesn't ask you what you know, it asks you what you can do. This means that in life, success is achieved by someone who has a large number of skills. I will say more, a person who knows how to collect bottles and recyclables on the street and knows where to turn them in, who knows how to quickly wash a car, will have more money than a person who is well-read and intellectually developed enough to understand Plato and Schopenhauer, but who is not able to wash the car correctly and quickly.
Knowledge, most often, is a dead weight. Ask yourself: What do I know and what can I do? And the most important question is: do you know how to apply your knowledge to achieve practical results?
Having knowledge, but not owning any practical craft, and dreaming of success is like trying to take off on a plane with one wing.
Remember what one of the gentlemen of fortune, Kosoy, used to say: I have a friend who is also a scientist. He has a three-grade education. So he will draw a chervonets like that, you can't tell it from the real one.
They pay you not for what you know (exceptions like Anatoly Wasserman are very rare), but for what you know how to do something useful. For example, glass the window, change the door or lock, repair the titanium, or repair the washing machine. Simple things, but they pay well for them.
I'm not even talking about the ability to repair plumbing or the qualifications of a welder who can cook pipes of any diameter. This is generally a highly paid job.
But from these simple skills, many have grown, albeit small, but their own business. Moreover, this is the type of business (repair of plumbing, household appliances, cars, apartment repairs, etc.) that practically does not require monetary investment. Only hands and tools. And professional knowledge of these things. But a person who is not looking for investments can develop a business based only with the help of personal skills.
I wouldn't pay a dime to someone who's developed enough to talk to me about Kantian mechanics or world literature at my level. But I pay a lot of money to smart plumbers and welders who can't tell Homer from the Iliad.
Skills such as: run three kilometers, bring a bath or 10 bags of potatoes to the ninth floor, mix a bucket of concrete mortar, change the floors in the apartment, much more valuable (in monetary terms), the ability to read a hundredweight of books.
Reading SENSIBLE and WELL-WRITTEN books in the sense of self-development is: pleasure and relaxation, psychological dependence on spiritual food ,activation of mental activity and obtaining the necessary knowledge and answers to questions from someone else's life experience. This is communication with the author alone and insight into his understanding of the world. And this is serious, ” useful “and beneficial work for the entire human body.
If we take material well-being and career as the criteria for success in life, I don't think that such people are healthier, more enthusiastic, and therefore happier. Therefore, I don't understand what they have achieved so “more in life”. What can be more expensive than physical and mental health and a sense of joy and happiness.
The answer is very simple and lies on the surface; in particular, it concerns Russia quite strongly. The well-being of any society, country and people directly depends on who and how distributes wealth and resources among people. If a society is led by talented economists, real politicians, and real experts in their narrow fields, then the best job, the greatest resources for existence and development go to the largest possible number of literate and good people who strive for self-education. And if society and the distribution of benefits are led by those who only know about leadership that it looks like a” carrot and stick”, if there is no real policy, if the opinion of experts does not mean anything against the background of general noise and does not lead – then it is extremely rare for worthwhile, truly talented and gifted people to achieve something. Because all preferences and nepotism will be on the side of those who are similar to the last, uneducated, stagnant, unable to make a sober, objective assessment. In a different society, a society of pure reason and professionalism, unfair success would be as rare as the actual lifetime evaluation of a genius (who mostly lose their patents, live in poverty, and are exploited. Guess for yourself by whom. Not more talented and educated, that's for sure). The point is this. In the internal architecture of how society is built, and who leads it, what guides it, what drives it.
It seems to me that the question is not quite correctly posed. The author most likely meant the following: “why can people with a lot of knowledge doubt their opinion, but people with limited horizons speak confidently and believe that their opinion is the ultimate truth?”
And the answer to this question is quite simple. A smart person knows that an opinion can be refuted by other arguments and is able to change it under the pressure of arguments (as, most likely, he has done more than once in his life).
And for a not-quite-smart person, confidence in their knowledge borders on blind faith and, perhaps, superstition, let's call it that.
Because books are different.I've devoured a lot of literature in my life,but it was either the school curriculum (which disappeared immediately after writing an essay, presenting / answering a literature lesson), or entertainment literature (science fiction,fantasy,westerns, etc.), and I can't say that I learned a lot of useful and clever thoughts from what I read.Such people who shout about self-development through reading, read everything in a row, just to read, put it on display and pretentiously declare that they are developing, and others (who gain their experience through trial and error, fill their bumps and develop through action)- cattle.By reading tons of books, you learn to borrow other people's thoughts and use them on your own behalf.Much more valuable is what you came up with and what you came up with yourself.
Tell this to Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, etc.
The reason why this question seems relevant is that you consider “success” and examples of “success” within the framework of our national culture. The culture, I must say, is quite primitive and sometimes even archaic.
Indeed, in Russia, reading a large amount of theoretical literature can lead to little within the framework of the domestic understanding of “success”. Well, except for the theoretical areas.
And this is normal.
In the same way, studying the literature on nuclear physics is unlikely to allow an aboriginal from South Africa to achieve absolute success in his native village – a new cow, a couple of bags of corn and fresh clay for the walls of the hut.
But if you ask, for example, who manages the same native at the state level, or manages mines where an aboriginal for$ 2 a month extracts diamonds for export – you will definitely hear about a good education at the level of Oxford or Cambridge.
And this is also normal. Therefore, I would not be so categorical in this statement!
Why do people who do not read and do not develop in any way always find something to answer and achieve more in life than those who develop and read?
The obvious answer is: because they don't bother. 🙂 They do not reflect, do not think about the fate of the world and others.
Because, as Charles Bukowski said, ” The trouble with this world is that smart people are full of doubt, and stupid people are full of confidence.” And we face this every day and everywhere.