It's too easy for rich successful people who have made it to declare that you should follow your passion. We wouldn't hear a quote from the dozens of lesser-known physicists who struggled and wouldn't recommend the field, we just hear the quote from Feynman who was the lucky one.

For instance, I love painting and woodworking, but I suffer no illusions that I would do "well" in those fields, as even far more talented and experienced individuals that I know in those fields are struggling mightily and envy my hobbyist status.

I know and deal with some physicists and they all seem really happy and only one of them is famous/rich. The fact that you can always bail and go to finance seems to be a good backstop for them.

They clearly aren't struggling if you think they are far more talented. They are just struggling financially. Which is what all these hang-ups are about, including your own.

It's not a hang up if you can't pay your bills or afford to take a vacation once in a while. Mazlow's Hierarchy of Needs does require us to meet some basic needs regardless of our passions.

Even if you are an extraordinary woodworker, if you can barely meet rent, you are unlikely to find any happiness due to the stress you will need to manage day-to-day.

Quote would have been better if he said "and can" after "and want." But, as general advice, I think it's still pretty good.

It took me a long time to really believe quotes like that. It’s just not too convincing when the people quoted as saying “you don’t need to be extraordinary” are quotable because they’re extraordinary.

Eh, I mean.. Okay. Maybe this is true for the first steps into your profession, but after so many years in tech the amount of things I have to do that are, compared to my initial 'love' for tech, really horrible tasks vs the things I would like to be doing definately isn't in balance...

It's a nice idea, but this "do what you love" doesn't scale.

I mean, did it too, there was a day where I was super excited to be working as a developer or a sysadmin with tech I loved but after a while if you want to actually get anywhere that thing that you loved doing turns out to be a very small subset of what it takes to be great at something, or be senior enough to have responsability enough to steer things towards your interests..

So yeah. Do what you love at first; but what you love won't be enough in the long term and you're going to have to spend months of 12 hour shifts to migrate some horrible app or other at some point, or many points, and without doing some things that go against 'what you want to do' you'll never be able to do more of what you actually want to do...

Not sure if that makes sense..

I really wish I didn't go into software development as a profession, and instead went to school for something that still pays ok but could still enjoy programming on the side.

Yeah, it's a nice idea for me too. It's a (for me anyway) impossible to make call to give up the kind of salary we make as a senior in tech just because I miss coding for fun though..

I've had pretty good success with replacing programming as a hobby with other things though (biking, woodwork, parenting etc) and I don't really miss 'coding for fun' much anymore. Between clients I'll maybe do some to keep up to date, but that has a different feel to what it was like when I was young ;)

I mean, "do what you love" is a fine plan A. It will work out for some people, either in the "their passion makes them the best makes them rich" sense or at least the "because they love their work, they are happy even though they are not rich" sense.

But it doesn't hurt to have a "find something to do for money that you don't hate and maybe even enjoy some parts of, and then find some other stuff to do on the side that makes you feel like your life has meaning" plan B in your back pocket.

For me tech is the plan B and I've never truly gone after plan A. Sometimes I regret that but on the whole I think a well executed plan B makes way more sense than attempting plan A.

If you're successful enough with plan B you can FIRE and then more easily go after plan A, potentially multiple plan As.

Your comment reads like a quote from Rick&Morty!

I prefer Call Newport's point o view:

Beyond Passion: The Science of Loving What You Do https://www.calnewport.com/blog/2010/01/23/beyond-passion-th...

Excellent read! I enrolled in my second bachelors for Computer Science because of Cal Newport's influence on me: Choose something that is valuable and get good at it (competence). Then, use the career capital to get autonomy and relatedness. It also reminds me of why I want to become a part time software developer instead of full time, because I want to have the autonomy associated with being part time!

That’s a great insight. There have been times when I asked myself if I made the right choice by entering CS given the sad state of hiring process and all. Also, time and time again, I have been pushed into situations and circumstances where I don’t get to work on what I want to. All of these forced me to think about how I work and what I work on. Maybe I just need to sail the waters and find something new. The world is big and so are the opportunities. There is no reason to limit ourselves to certain well received means of earning a livelihood.

> Don't think about what you want to be, but what you want to do.

I would agree, as long as we differentiate between "'what' you want to be" and "'how' you want to be." I'd say that "what" is a function of other people and their evaluation of you---in the "what" category are "famous," "respected," "talented," "recognized," etc. Chasing these is vain.

But "'how' I want to be" is completely internal, and I don't rely on the approval of others for them: I want to be "disciplined," "thoughtful," "kind," "honest," etc. These are worth chasing, even though technically they do not deal what "what you want to 'do'" and could be construed to conflict with Feynman's thoughts (though I think they don't really).