For each topic, I’ve curated a few links that I’ve found to be pretty high quality.
- Meta:(Epiphany Addiction, Reversing Advice, Excellence Porn)
- @Learning:
- Success People: (Mastery),(ChoosingTopics: Osci,PG)
- Thinking: (Ikigai, Stoicism, Rationality)
- HabitChange: (!ShootDog)
- Productivity.Principles/Energy/Relaxation:(FullEngagement, ArtOfLearning)
- Productivity.Systems/Hacks: (Autofocus, GTD/ZTD, EatFrog),(Scott Young)
- Depression/Anxiety:
- Social:
- Meditation
Full List: https://workflowy.com/s/zUTEaY0ZcJ
I'd like feedback on:
- What other categories/links would you include (I'm sure there's lots of interesting stuff I'm missing.)? What do you think of the categorization ("Thinking" is a pretty large category.)?
- Whether you think I should make cross-posts about sub-topics here. The main benefit of making more cross posts is that the discussion/comments would be more focused on those topics. In particular, I think that looking at SuccessfulPeople.Startups, SuccessfulPeople.Science, and the Meditation document are the most original parts of this post.
- SuccessfulPeople.Startups contains a categorization of some of Paul Graham's essays (e.g. Having ideas, fund-raising, executing, etc).
- The SuccessfulPeople.Science link contains a separate categorization of advice specifically for scientists (e.g. Picking ideas, the importance of being persistent, the importance of reading widely, etc).
- The meditation document lists a few high quality meditation resources that I've found (and I've read ~10 books on meditation. Most of it is crap. Some of the stuff I list is orders of magnitude better than the median meditation book I've read.).
- Whatever seems salient to you.
"Letting go" is something that can't be forced.
I have not said something about "really wanting to" being bad. The problem is attachment. If you have once a really great experience meditating and then get attached to the idea of recreating that experience you usually don't get anywhere.
IIRC, the author doesn't use the phrase "letting go" anywhere in the book. He operationalizes all the terms/skills/states he talks about like differentiating between continuity of attention and sharpness of attention. I think the goal's he's talking about are very specific/operationalized.
My bad. That was a bit of a straw man on my part.
... (read more)