Fellows,

After watching The Social Network, a brilliant piece of movie directed by David Fincher (this is entirely a comment of my own), I was wondering whether with pure passion imbued with undying conviction on your own ideals, could you really or possibly succeed in life where all we know is money is the tool that moves the world around.

According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs coined by Abraham Maslow himself, it is well understood that passion is located on the tip of the Pyramid of Needs which is known as Self Actualisation and before fulfilling that, one must first satisfy the other 4 elements below Self Actualisation, which are:

-) Esteem - understood by that school of thought as self confidence, personnel achievements, respect.

-) Love - As the tittle suggest, yes. The feeling of being loved and cared of.

-) Physiological - Those stuffs needed to survive, like air, food, place of shelter, education and security and of course Money

Hence, would you think that with only passion, yes, only passion, it is enough to bring wealth while in the same time achieving self actualisation, like how Zuck did, and to do it in country like Malaysia, with attention on being critical, pragmatic and realistic?

Debate's open for all and please ensure that only scholarly replies here, with proper citation and credits given.

Note: Previously listed in RWI, but since no one's there to reply to this thread, suggested it is moved here to PhD school.

SevenTwentyOne,

When you asked the WRONG question, you will NEVER get the RIGHT answer!!!

The CORRECT question should be

If you are NOT passionate about something, how could you DEVOTE 100% of your time and effort on IT?? Money can ONLY motivate a person so much...

Now, if you are REALLY passionate about something, why would you CARE whether you ACHIEVE anything out of it?? The JOURNEY is the REWARD.

It is OBVIOUS that you are NOT passionate about anything yet.

So, have you EVER do something just because you LOVE it?? And, you DO NOT CARE whether you get something out of it?? That is PASSION!!!

Dreamer

Dreamer,

I believe my question is crystal clear; How to achieve wealth why maintaining your passion in doing things you want as practical as possible.


Yes, without passion, one wouldn't care to put his fullest of attention here. Well said.


This is not pragmatic enough, sir. Because if you having difficulties to put food on the table and fulfilling the basic of Maslow's, passion could be rather a superfluous dream only.

While for the rest, there is no Points of Informations as they are not relevant. However thanks a lot for your reply. Especially from a forummer of your calibre.

Regards,
721

I haven't watch The Social Network.

Hmmm... It can be done.. Unfortunately, on our way to achieving self-actualization through material wealth, we often be easily sidetracked. It depends where your virtue are.

The virtue of self-actualization is 'truth', while the virtue of getting rich is 'win' where most of our d-needs are based upon (most of the time).

Truth is where you understand that there are things that transcends most dichotomies of life. From there you will gain the understanding of the 'wholeness' off things. It will also liberate yourself from many psychological constraint present in most of 'common' people.


Self-actualization also does not equates to wealth. Take for an example albert einstein (who according to the literature 'The farther reaches of human nature' is considered among those who are self-actualised), he is not that rich (in today's modern capitalistic sense). Passionate he is, but not extremely affluent, materially of financially.

But, of course, you have to get some level of wealth before you can gain self-actualization.

BTW, passion IS a need. It is a meta-need, which is higher than physical and social need.

This post has been edited by LuciferAmadeus: Feb 16 2011, 01:05 PM

How do you measure success? A pile of money in your bank account or making an impact on the world?

Was Mother Theressa successful?

In the software world, what about people like Linus Thorvalds, Larry Wall, or even Richard M Stallman. People who did not seek to maximize the money they get from what they make. They've certainly left their mark in the computer world. But they did seek to turn it into a big pile of cash like what Marc Andreesson got. Not to say that doing so is bad or evil in anyway. But does refraining from doing so mark you as unsuccessful?

Good thread. Looking forward to see how the discussion would turn out.

dkk,

Definitely no. As defined in Maslow's, self actualisation and self attainment are the same thing, hence inter alia. Thereupon, it seems that it is definitely in sync with school of thoughts like Buddhism Buddhism.

The very essence of Buddhism is for one to become self attained, hence enlightenment of one's action, liberation of one's thought and ultimately cessation of suffering.

To cease from suffering, it is imperative to identify why, at first, one suffers.

Some people have loads of cash, but do they sleep well at night?

Hope that it rings a bell. However, a good try indeed.

Regards,
721

This post has been edited by SevenTwentyOne: Feb 17 2011, 02:13 AM

Well, i don't really understand what exactly a virtue is in philosophical sense, but i hope to be enlightened by this discussion.

'Win' can be achieved through hardworking, and so does 'truth'. Hardworking thus is only a tool, not a virtue.


That's why in self-actualization, one of the virtues is self-sufficiency. It is a must that you can take care of yourself. But, that does not mean that you have to be ridiculously wealthy to take care of yourself for 8 lifetimes. Enough that you gain to cater your needs in whatever realistic time frame foreseeable, and let the far future be determined not far before it.

If zuck uses his virtues to achieve wealth, then he has undermine the virtues and cares more about wealth. That is not a characteristics of a self-actualizer. The obsession with wealth is a neurotic tendency, because it may have developed from deprivation of lower needs from the lack of wealth in his life-history or it may have developed from inculcated culture. Self-actualizers should not have strong neurotic tendencies.

If that 'brilliant work' is born out of the obsession of wealth, then it is a neuroticism. If he gets wealth from the 'brilliant work' conceived out of the virtues (in this case 'passion' and 'perfection'), he got the fringe benefit of being a self-actualizer.

P/S: Passion is also one of self-actualizers' virtues.
P/SS: I'm discussing virtues in Maslowian's sense.

This post has been edited by LuciferAmadeus: Feb 17 2011, 03:40 PM

Scholarly reviews are needed in order for the advancement of civilization xD

---

Added on February 17, 2011, 7:30 pm

Wealth of monetary is wordly gratification, yes. Wealth of knowledge is a virtue. How about that?

This post has been edited by SevenTwentyOne: Feb 17 2011, 07:30 PM

SevenTwentyOne,

<<How to achieve wealth >>

Your question is NOT on how to put food on table. It is ON how to achieve wealth.

And, I had answered the QUESTION. Without PASSION, you cannot PUT in the EFFORT needed to achieve wealth and success.

Dreamer

---

Added on February 17, 2011, 11:19 pmdkk,

It is VERY SIMPLE. If you are living in lifestyle that you are happy with and doing the things that you like, you are SUCCESSFUL.

YOU determine whether you are successful. YOU compare what you are and have versus what your goal is. If you are HAPPY and CONTENT, you are SUCCESSFUL.

Nobody else know whether you are successful except by detecting whether you are HAPPY.

Dreamer

This post has been edited by dreamer101: Feb 17 2011, 11:19 PM

Actually, as long as you achieve what you want to achieve then you are succesful.
A successful person would then be simply categorized as one who constantly achieve their goals.
It has nothing to do with how you feel.


This post has been edited by teongpeng: Feb 17 2011, 11:33 PM

Dreamer,

According to your saying, would it all come under this precedent: Passion-->>Effort-->>Hardworking-->>Money-->>Wealth ?
If it is so, then you are indeed indicating the 5 levels contained in the Hierarchy Of Needs.

According to m-w.com, passion, other than the often capitalized usage in the biblical studies, are:
intense, driving, or overmastering feeling or conviction

Hence, if one needs to make things right first, conviction is needed, hence passion.
Good one indeed.

However still, this is still NOT enough to make a person to achieve something groundbreaking I believed, and I also thinks that my believe is nothing since it is not from a scholar, but still there is a missing piece of virtue that is ultimately needed to ensure not a conviction, but a FULL and UNDIVIDED one. Ideas are needed here, dreamer.

Regards, 721.

112

This post has been edited by gomes.: Apr 23 2011, 05:32 PM

SevenTwentyOne,

Whether that is ENOUGH or NOT, that is a SEPARATE question. But, without PASSION, you will NEVER START and SUSTAIN your effort. Hence, you will not have a SHOT to achieve anything significant to begin with.

Do you UNDERSTAND something SIMPLE??

You could ONLY put in YOUR EFFORT and give your BEST SHOT. There is NEVER a guarantee that you will be successful. You could NEVER control all the external variables that determine the FINAL OUTCOME. But, if you do not give your BEST SHOT, your chance of succeeding is even lower.

Focus and execution. The rest is up to God / Karma.

Dreamer

P.S.: My statement is from the FIRST HAND OBSERVATION of my life and many of my friends and family members.

P.S.2: How old are you?? What have you done in your life?? There are things that I could tell you but until you experienced it yourself, you will not understand what I am talking about.

---

Added on February 18, 2011, 6:47 amteongpeng,

The SECRET of Happiness is contentment.

Contentment = achieving goal.

They go together...

Dreamer

This post has been edited by dreamer101: Feb 18 2011, 08:06 AM

LoL... this is getting philosophical, and in no way I am good at it. Let's see...

Virtues, in my opinion, are the values that allow people to fully live their respective life harmoniously together, with the observable reality as the intermediary. (

Edit

Edit 2

Hence, the virtues are:
1. Truth - that is the objective truth which does not contradict reality
2. Wholeness - that is choice that transcends dichotomies
3. Perfection - that is un-fractured and consistent nature of reality. (Edit: my explanation here doesn't make sense.. perfection is a virtue because mediocrity and flaw means we are not fully living our life)
4. Self-sufficiency - that is independence from the reliance to each other
5. Passion - that is the sense of purpose in living our life
6. Simplicity - that is allowing us to understand each other effortlessly

I think there are many more, but i have trouble finding/explaining it.


Well, based on my definition of virtue, a virtue is a worldly gratification (if by worldly you mean earthly). There's nothing mystic about it.
The difference is that excessive material wealth often is at the expense of another person (hence not a virtue) while wealth of knowledge can be achieved by everyone harmoniously (not at the expense of another).

This post has been edited by LuciferAmadeus: Feb 18 2011, 09:53 AM

Hmm, wise words from dreamer 101.

Took me a little long to realise that the acquisition of wealth alone does not make you a happy and successful person.

There are too many people living their life not knowing or not pursuing their passion.

First of all i wasnt talking about happiness. i was talking about the definination of success.

Second of all, contentment IS NOT about achieving goals. Contentment is about having no more goals to achieve.

---

Added on February 18, 2011, 9:35 amThus the purpose of this thread. We know that wealth does not lead to happiness. But the question is, can happiness/passion lead to wealth?

This post has been edited by teongpeng: Feb 18 2011, 09:38 AM

teongpeng,

I am content NOW. It does not mean that I have no more goal to achieve in the FUTURE. But, I had achieved what I wanted to achieve NOW.

Past is gone. Future is uncertain. What you have is NOW. Live at the MOMENT.

Dreamer

This is correct. However as a practitioner of zen, you should also understand that success or achievement arent only revolved around getting a result. Look deeper, the very act of doing, the very act of putting in your best effort, is already a success because the journey is now the the goal. When your goal is just to do your best, and you did your best, you are already succesful in that goal. GUARANTEED.

---

Added on February 18, 2011, 9:47 amYou may be content now, but if you have future goals to achieve then you are no longer content. Can you understand this?

You can only be content if your goal is to act, thus when you are in action in the NOW, you are living your goal moment to moment.

If you can only be content based on what you have achieved in the past, then you are living in the past. Thats not zen.

This post has been edited by teongpeng: Feb 18 2011, 09:55 AM

teongpeng,

1) I understand non-attachment. Just too hard to explain...

You may be content now, but if you have future goals to achieve then you are no longer content. Can you understand this?

2) So what?? That is the future's problem!! Zen means LIVE NOW. Aka, at the MOMENT. Always at the moment. Be the best. Do the best that you could NOW. Let's tomorrow take care of the tomorrow's problem.

3) You do not live at tomorrow. You LIVE NOW. And, NOW is all you have...

Dreamer

I'm content now because of what I have, what I achieved, and what I will or will not achieve. Nothing's wrong with that. =) You can be content now and still have goals.

TS, you might want to bring this discussion back to its focus... our fellow forumers here start to argue un-resolveable subjective issue here...

This post has been edited by LuciferAmadeus: Feb 18 2011, 10:13 AM

None of that are virtues.

1. Truth is not virtue, being honest is.
2. wholeness is not virtue, wholesome action is.
3. perfection is not virtue, striving to be better is.
4. self-sufficiency is not a virtue, making the effort to be independant is.
5. passion is not a virtue, following your passion is (or could be?)
6. simplicity is not virtue - being simple is.

3. and 4. ofcourse can be summarised as virtue of hardwork and honet effort.

This post has been edited by teongpeng: Feb 18 2011, 10:32 AM

Yes, i'm mistaken with my simplistic usage of term...

semantics "

This post has been edited by LuciferAmadeus: Feb 18 2011, 10:36 AM

yup i agree its just semantics. I didnt say your content/message is wrong. Just that its important that we clarify certain usage of words so that if we were to have future discussions, we would be talking on the same page.

Do you think it should be striving for perfection? (not necessarily to be perfect, just striving to make our perception and understanding perfect)

Because i think 'better' brings the relative connotation, it will be endless and may cause anxiety. Assuming that reality is finite (and i think that is a valid assumption based on our limited perception, hence finite reality), perfection is absolute within our senses hence hypothetically achievable.

This post has been edited by LuciferAmadeus: Feb 18 2011, 10:51 AM

Stirving for perfection or striving to be better are merely differenct standard in the goal we set for ourselves. The virtue here is hardwork and making an effort, taking initiative etc. Other virtues involved are honesty, courage, faith and steadfast, and to a lesser degree, respect. All these virtues have to be combined and cultivated by the person seeking to better themselves, so as not to give up halfway or being misled into wrong teachings.

Virtues when cultivated, grows. And like plants being watered, it will start to bear fruits (the result of the virtue). So yes, how we cultivate the plant, starting from the seed, determines what quality of fruits we will get.

On your assertion that striving for perfection is better than merely striving to be better,i can see where you are coming from. But like i said this is just the difference in the standard we set for ourselves. In my opinion, striving for perfection, although noble in intent, is very hard to achieve and sometimes we may be dejected by the constant failure to reach a goal too distanct in the future. On the other hand, just wanting to be better than we were before, allows us to achieve successful result with each attempt. Our success can be measured and confirmed sooner. Constant success reinforces our believes and encourages us on our path. Such constant positive reinforcements is also beneficial to our self esteem and this indirectly effects our confidence in other aspects of our lives.

Like right now, i've just taken up running/jogging as a sport. To be perfect in running would mean to be able to win a marathon. But my approach isnt to win any marathon although one day i might. Now i'm just focused on being a better runner month by month. I try not to focus on where i will end up as a runner, instead i just allow my hardwork to bear its own result.

In other words, im more interested to DISCOVER the result, rather than moving towards a certain one. This way, i can never fail.

But alas this is just a matter of different perceptions and approach. We are all different. Do what feels right to you.

This post has been edited by teongpeng: Feb 18 2011, 11:57 AM

Hmmm... there must be a reason why Maslow put perfection rather than betterment as an element of virtue.

Maybe i misinterpreted perfection here. Perhaps perfection here means 'suitability'. It means that it is grounded on reality and can be reasonably accepted by other people.

Betterment is not Maslowian virtue, because it implies (implies only, doesn't really mean "it means") that we cannot accept ourselves, hence be anxious to strive for better while not knowing where it will end.

what is perfection? do you know where it will end?

Peeps,

Looks like this thread has started to gain a lot of wisdom replies, especially from an esteemed forum-er like dreamer101 and some. It is good that he has shared with us, simplistically enough to understand that passion is is the virtue needed to for someone to command a groundbreaking thoughts, while:

-the adequacy passion is a separate issue, hence it is not related to this debate.

- taking the first step is paramount, let other things handle themselves on the recourse of karma, which is 'what goes around comes around', when an action that was done will result in a reaction that correspond to the action or deed that was involved. Wikipedia: Karma.

Also dreamer101 has taken to explain to us the intricacy of Zen, which I would not dwell much into since this thread is originally opened to discuss how to achieve a groundbreaking results while being critical, pragmatic (ability to to act or practice while excluding artistic and intellectual matters, and its antonym is idealistic) and being realistic.

He has been [b]specific here:


While being pragmatic:


My notes: First hand observation is not conclusive without a good proven hypothesis done in controlled environment. Could you enlighten us more with scholarly citations? And I'm only 24 this year. Experiences? Not as deep as yours of course, but that does not matter here because that IS a well said statement, indeed.

And with both of that statement, he has indeed being very real and honest.

**************************************

Therefore, ladies and gentlemen fellow forummers, my conclusion on how to achieve something unique, would be, to borrow from dreamer's replies, be passionate, because:
- Without passion, which happened to be a virtue and when it is a virtue a discussion will somehow bound to become rather philosophical and idealistic due to interference of religious beliefs and dogmas.

-While to become a pragmatist in achieving a goal, one should NOT listen or follow other people's thinking. What he, dreamer has trying to make sense here would be to take the first step and do an act wholeheartedly. Well said.

- Also, to be realistic, when you are having or showing a sensible and practical idea of what can be achieved or expected askoxford.com: Realistic: to be sensible is as simple as it sounds like, do something that make sense and to be practical, that potential act must have a reasonable proportion of success while performing under standard conditions, in which everyone has their OWN standard.

Henceforth the question is considered answer and justified. Be passionate, other things are secondary.

Thanks for all contributions and replies, scholarly or otherwise. Still, I am not satisfied with this unless it can be justified by a learned expert, with proper citations because afterall, this is PhDSchool and as a scientist, a real one or aspired to be, acts are proven in experiment. That is because, wisdom is an ability of deep understanding to act optimally, hence with minimum amount of time and energy. Cited from Wikipedia: Wisdom. And wisdom is not experimentally justified virtue. [debate this]

Hence, please include your citation in following replies, else this discussion would turn to be another catch-22 discussion. =)

However, I believed that dreamer has answered all the queries whilst being crictical, pragmatic, and realistic, minus citations. Therefore, this thread is slated for closure.

Regards,
721

This post has been edited by SevenTwentyOne: Feb 20 2011, 10:48 PM

To me, success doesn't only mean wealth. It includes my own-being, and how much i manage to contribute to the society.

Given that the latter definition of perfection (suitability), it would be enough if most of our actions are realistic and does not interfere with other reasonable people. Hence, we can stop there once we achieved the two conditions.

Maslowian self-actualizers are realistic in action, but idealistic in aspiration, and they know how to separate reality and the ideal. Striving for the better is realistic, but so does striving for perfection (as in 'suitability'). The difference is that perfection is definite, while better will always be relative.

The idea of maslow's hierarchy of need is of 'liberation', hence it requires 'effortlessness' (that's why i cringe every time i use the word 'striving' when i talk about self-actualization). 'Striving for better' will always be a continuous effort, while 'Striving (Going might be a more suitable word?) for perfection' once achieved will always be a natural definiteness.

This post has been edited by LuciferAmadeus: Feb 21 2011, 12:14 PM