Ignorance may be bliss, but only if you can remain ignorant until the absolute end. I see evidence of a paradox whereby the most powerful analytical minds are able to most effectively construct defensive counter arguments to their own inherent existential needs, allowing them to defer these needs until a criticality is reached and existential crisis manifests as a state of limbic terror which is impossible to ignore. The crisis is ultimately inevitable, and thus the ignorance only temporary, because they are in fact smart enough to realize deep down that something essential is out of balance. A polish psychiatrist named Dabrowski labeled some of these experiences 'positive disintegration' and wrote prolifically about their role in psychosocial development.

After nearly 500 hours of meditating in relative isolation, i promise you, the collector collects.

Something inside us, wild and free, wants to be happy, and we stand in its way.

> the collector collects

Can you expand on this?

—— Short answer ——

I experienced some things in meditation, consistent with Buddhist cannon.

I encountered a “judge” mechanism, that manifested as an emotion. It “knew everything” (makes sense, it was basically me pointing the finger at me) and it wasnt interested in talking things out. It wants to be happy, and it blames me for its unhappiness. It was a terrifying feeling, very painful.

I believe non-meditators experience this during death, and that “wild part” of us comes back to have one last conversation, and a settling of debts.

——— Long answer ———

Ive spent some time doing vipassana, exploring my inner world -

I also read a lot of carl jung, and come from a family of non religious mental health practitioners. So i dont consider myself clueless, or particularly naive or impressionable.

After that intro ... i experienced some deeply disturbing things: bodily convulsions and pains, which subsided after some time too, and were experienced on an emotional level (meditation shuts/slows down thinking mechanisms, to stop generating mind chatter) -

when the silence increases inside our head, mind chatter disappears but something else takes its place .. emotions, deep intense emotions start to rise - its during those moments of deep mind silence that some pretty bad feelings start to arise inside me, of something deeply unhappy about how im living my life, because it wants to be happy, and i am in this body, is its tool. it wasn't just angry, it was full of grief, and so scared to the point of terror.

Again, it wasn't a discussion, i got the feeling it a prt lf me that wasnt interested in talking things out (it knows everything about me already, its me) it was a deep emotion of intense meaning, and terror and loneliness.

I didn't give my feelings significance before, im also still an atheist - but i now think/believe that being human has a truth we are blind to, and some of these truths are experienced at death, so if you lived a life against your “conscience” - if you ask me, id say it will hold you responsible for its happiness. (I havnt experienced the other part where its happy about what i do, in a way it was a corrective self-bitchslap. Life is still ongoing - so its not all terrible, yet)

Beautifully said.

Today it is pretty well established that it is your thoughts create your emotions. Dabrowski was on the path to discovering this but he missed the latent variable here and was too focused on having an individual having a crisis in order to bring about positive change which is not necessary or required.

Certain individuals may not require an existential crisis to achieve the uppermost stage of conscious integration but for others (most) I believe it to be absolutely necessary.

What exactly is an existential crisis? What differentiates it from a regular crisis?

Have you not met anyone who went through a period of questioned assumptions, got to their answers, and consciously chose a path that fulfills them? Those seem to be the happiest people around. Many people who have gone through this process do end up at the answers of family, or helping others. I'm unclear from your writing if you accept those answers as valid, or if you are being dismissive of those answers and assuming that anyone focused on family must not have gone through a self-discovery process in their youth.

The older I get, the more I find that almost everyone battles through the questions of who they are and what they are doing with their lives. Most people question their values and purpose. I disagree wholeheartedly that content people don't ponder their lives. On the contrary, they are content because they are past that phase of life, and content because they are living a well-considered path. We are not deferring anything - we completed the process, made our choices, and are living them.

I agree with your initial assessment but for second, It depends. I have gone through that or so I believe. And yet I don't see point in living in current circumstances.

The irrational or rational mind compares the experiences of others as a measure for their own happiness when they feel that something is not right.

Going by what feels right works as long as there is positive reinforcement otherwise it will have a negative side effect on life. Some people aren't for example aware of choices others have made in their life because they don't focus on them, those choices lead them to happiness or better standing ground but for others, those choices that aren't in their control leading to a very negative event may disproportionately affect them and questioning.

You can't control for your initial years or childhood and That I think has the biggest impact on whether you will come across solving it.

It feels right to cry out in misery but rational or irrational mind would think it might be pointless if for however long you cry, no one comes to help or nothing improves.

I don't know what is considered rational or irrational thing to do given anything may seem rational for someone in specific circumstances and irrational for bystander. Is there such a thing as objective rationality that can be verified?

I don't think OP is referring to meaning in an existential or epistemological sense, but rather discussing workaholism as a "practical" avoidant behavior for those who put off dealing with some kind of dysfunction or trauma.

In my own attempts at reasoning this stuff the only meaning that I've been able to find is that life is meaningless. Therefore the only thing to do is be comfortable with that null of an answer, and live as you see fit.

Life doesn't have external meaning. But that doesn't make it meaningless. We still have feelings and preferences. Some are short-term, some are long-term. The internal meaning of life is encoded in these preferences.

The preferences aren't stable, because we and others have influence on the meaning of life. You get some choice! Others can affect the meaning of your life. Hopefully for the better.

To say life is meaningless is wrong to me. Because we experience these profound moments of meaning on occasion. Either positive or negative. So to me, these moments of meaning are my guide. This means deep friendships, being there for people, contributing to society, trying to become a better / stronger person, and just trying to enjoy myself most of the time.

same but that leads to another locked door for me. Statistically speaking, the quality of life I want to get (expectations reduced by 5x for being extra cautious) still has a chance of 2-5% given my background of ever being real. Why should I place my bet on such a shitty investment package which most people get for nothing? Fixing my current problems alone would take me years and that will put me near average person by the time, the gap is probably already widened.

Sounds like you have a goal. Making progress toward a goal can be satisfying. Even more so than reaching the goal. One problem I see is that you are comparing yourself to others (you mention the average person). Whatever landed you where you're at is unique to you. It's your challenge to overcome and should not be compared to anyone else. There's only you today and you tomorrow. Keep moving toward that goal even if it takes a lifetime.

I am aware of that. I am not comparing my experience but rather taking average as a baseline.

If 40 out of 50 people end up in poverty in my neighborhood, then chances are I will given how similar metrics for ending in poverty is. Of course it's not always good but not sure where I can draw a line when I feel 'something' is not satisfying.

You can compare it to people who are unaware that they are depressed or have mental issues after pressure to accept it and reinforced narrative that everyone goes through it surrounding them.

Some comparison is needed :/ and it is too hard for someone who feels mostly the same when achieving something valued by society vs achieving nothing. Enjoying the journey is cool and all but it's a trap if all your motivation or enjoyment comes from self praise and you are not dependent on external stimuli for it. Being too critical of your self can be addicting itself but I haven't really find a way to balance things out and I doubt I ever will unless I change the fundamental blocks of who I have been so far. That is a disturbingly challenging thing to do and seems more effort than being a druggie and early death :3

I wish the voice in my head had a turn off button ugh. It's always a second person commenting on everything it sees.

You need to set your aspirations at a reasonable level and have goals that are relatively close (say, one order of magnitude away by some metric) to what you have now, with a plan that can get you there.

Also:

> If 40 out of 50 people end up in poverty in my neighborhood, then chances are I will given how similar metrics for ending in poverty is.

This isn't the case at all. Most people don't prioritise wealth generation. They prioritise things like staying close to family, maintaining old friendships, not moving, working in a specific field or on specific problems they enjoy, etc.

If you actually go out there and seek it, yeah, it's hard, but the odds aren't anywhere near as stacked as you're making out.

The odds are mostly stacked against you in the sense of things like health issues, or passports, etc. Growing up simply with not much money isn't that hard to get out of.

That was an example, not exactly my situation. If wealth generation alone was a metric, I wouldn't have that much problem but regarding the last statement, most research would disagree. Growing up in poverty fuels a mindset of poverty, I have experienced it first hand. Maybe things are different in other places so I am not gonna make a generalization about anything else. Poor countries with overflow tends to have people who put wealth accumulation above all.

And I think I set a reasonable expectation. That is one thing I am afraid of doing the most, setting expectations high that you would never reach for myself or others. I don't find any balance here. I don't have any metrics to compare or find a reasonable solution to what I should expect of others or whether at all. Do I expect my family to be reasonable or not? Do I expect my environment to be friendly or not? If overestimate, disappointment. If you underestimate, trap of trust issues and general existential crisis of why bother.

I just decided I want an average first world life quality eventually but THAT is hard. Eh, getting average quality of life removing the wealth as a metric here is hard.

I guess I could call it cultural, environmental or social disintegration?

I don't know a lot about your situation but it sounds to me like for the most part you need to 'get out' and somehow manage a visa or whatever to a first world country. That seems like a reasonable goal to me?

Different magnitude of situation, but I felt the same way about my hometown. It wasn't really about money, though it felt that way at the time - I just needed to find my people, and they weren't there.

> Growing up simply with not much money isn't that hard to get out of.

I might be misunderstanding but are you saying that upwards class mobility is easy, specifically from the lowest end?

Not at all. Upwards class mobility, in the true sense, is essentially impossible within a single generation. Speaking from a British perspective, a child with a poor upbringing is unlikely to be able to convince others, at least on close inspection, that they aren't actually a prole. (How might I know that?)

I am specifically talking about, as I say, "growing up without much money". A poor individual getting from the bottom, or close to it, up to a solid income (say 80th percentile). From there, the wealth is a matter of financial discipline. Some of the 'class' might come, but life is not an act, and Tarquin will always differ.

At least where I'm from (UK), it's a trivial problem in the sense that an equation might be trivial to solve, for an individual. The ingredients are there; an individual must apply themselves to the task at hand.

If you are healthy and of reasonable intelligence, obtain a degree from a good university, and apply those skills to a job, it's quite hard to fail at that catastrophically.

In a collective sense it is impossible, at least the way that society is currently set up. A lot of people have to not be on top.

What confuses people a lot is that they look at these statistical averages and assume that because most of the poor remain poor (and most of the rich remain rich - wealth is sticky), the same likelihoods apply to them.

But if you're actually trying to get out of that situation (most people honestly aren't - they might say they are, but it's not their #1 priority) you're not in that same cohort and you can quite easily be more competitive than those brought up in middle income families.

This is all based on my experience in Britain. In the US it's probably different.

If you're born in a poor _country_ then you probably need to get out first, and I imagine the whole passport visa situation is rather a challenge.

If you're born with severe disabilities, and poor, you could well be shit out of luck. So it goes.

> EDIT: One other thing to note is that people who are fairly content with their lives don't often ponder _why_ their life is meaningful.

Is meaningful the same as happy? What I think is there are a great deal of unhappy people who attempt to make it as if their thinking and point of the way they feel is representative of what others are like or even should be. Many of these people have either things going right in their life (job, relationships, money) and are still not happy (maybe because they suffer from depression). Or they have addictions they can't shake and are not happy. Or they are simply trying to be something they are not and are not happy.

Small example - Do I question why I comment on HN? There is no reason I just like to say things. I don't need to break down any impact other than 'it is something I want to do that makes me feel something that I like to feel'. Ditto for other things.

Look at how presumptions the title of the article is to begin with "What Happens When Your Career Becomes Your Whole Identity". Right off the top it is saying that it's wrong for your career to be 'your entire identity'.

Would anyone say 'what happens when being healthy makes you happy?'. What's this judgement with deciding what is enough for one person is the same for most people?

Then things like this:

> Dan’s story is not uncommon. Many people with high-pressure jobs find themselves unhappy with their careers, despite working hard their whole lives to get to their current position. Hating your job is one thing — but what happens if you identify so closely with your work that hating your job means hating yourself?

Not uncommon? Why does that matter? If I have a hobby that 'is not common' or feel a way 'that is common' so what?

I agree with your point, just want to add; I think the point of existential deliberation at it's root is to overcome existential despair. I think for 'typical' people doing what feels right is an effective means to overcome this, but people who deliberate on it obsessively do so because they either don't know what feels right or are unable to extinguish their despair by doing what feels right, and are driven to search for answers. Like you said, trying to use reason to find some meaning in life is probably not going to be successful. Some people, I suspect, might be unable to stop obsessing about the meaning of life and that could be the cause of their despair. They'll never find an answer and get relief in that way, but they also don't have the power to stop themselves from trying

I agree with you that being right about these things isn't possible. As you say, values are not deduced. But being in agreement with yourself is possible and that's really the whole point.

Some people may intuitively fall into agreement with themselves, but most do not.

Thanks for this comment, it puts into words some ideas I've been considering in a very concise manner. Also, the replies are quite interesting.