
Every generation gets the self-help guru it deserves - wyclif
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/09/05/110905fa_fact_mead
======
abdulhaq
I swear (not having heard of Tim Ferris) I thought this article was a
brilliant send-up of the self-help industry and the public's appetite for it.
Towards the end of the article I was in awe of the journalist, who made it
sound almost-believable while being so ridiculous - and then I saw the comment
here and after a bit of googling I realised: this thing is real.

~~~
xal
Tim is real. He is a hacker at heart. He does to time and body exactly the
kind of stuff that we here celebrate doing to computers.

~~~
_delirium
I like some of it, but much of it seems a lot less scientific than what we try
to do to computers. Have any of these odd health remedies been empirically
tested? Does organic almond butter on celery sticks actually repeatably reduce
insomnia? (Also, is its organic-ness a statistically significant factor in its
efficacy?) It seems to have an uncomfortably high overlap with some of the
natural-medicine/new-age-remedies crowd, in terms of having (sometimes)
scientifically _plausible_ arguments for a mechanism, but not much in the way
of empirical evidence validating the effect.

~~~
mattgreenrocks
I bought it when it came out.

You have to understand that the entire premise of the book is that n = 1.
There's nothing scientific about it. It's not billed as such, and it is silly
to expect it to be so. Sure, Ferriss dips into talking about the science of
the body at times, and often tries to couch his forays in it, but the reason
it is interesting/amusing is that he tries out some of these ridiculous ideas
to see if they actually work.

It should be viewed as a jumping-off point, not an authoritative source.

------
wccrawford
From the title, I thought this was going to be a negative article.

Instead, it says something which should be obvious: Self-help gurus are
successful because they address current issues that people are having.

... That sounds so amazingly obvious that you are now wondering why it had to
be said, I'm sure. I know I am.

But after thinking for a bit, I've decided that maybe the guru doesn't fit the
times... Maybe the guru would have been successful at any time, if they lived
then? They have an eye for the world, how to fix it efficiently, and how to
tell people how to.

Ferriss' books have been on my to-read list for a while... I guess I should
get around to it.

~~~
guylhem
"Addressing the issues people are having" defines finding a market - a good
thing here :-)

However, I would like to question these issues in the first place.

They look a lot like an existentialist crisis to me - basically finding no
purpose in one's own worth, and thus spending time doing something deemed
worthwhile and in line with individualistic values : "improving" oneself.

Better abs, travel, less time spend at work - that's what's popular today, but
is this the successful recipe for reaching happiness? I strongly doubt that.

What about using some of these wits to actually create some economic activity
or solving different problems? You know, mastery, independence, purpose? At
least there are more proofs there.

I fear this investment on the self is misguided - since it has a negative
interest rate (because until we get better at cryogenics you still die in the
end).

I could believe in an investment of the self if it was consistent - but
besides the revasterol thing mentionned in the article (which doesn't work on
primates unless you have a special gene removed IIRC), it seems very lowball.

That's how I'd sum it up - minimalist in the "minimal effective dose" sense,
low risk - low gain, no passion. Mod that down if you want, but I'm sure we
can do much better as a species.

~~~
jonnathanson
Exactly. Ferris rails against what he describes as "the deferred life," or
traditional work-and-retire life planning. But he swings the pendulum too far
in the opposite direction, advocating living entirely in, and for, the
present.

What both of these philosophies seem to miss is that the self exists to create
something enduring. This can be a legacy, or a company, or children, or a work
of art, or essentially anything that outlasts the expiration of one's body and
mind. Neither the deferred life nor Ferris's "4 Hour Workweek" places any sort
of priority on this type of long-term goal, and achieving such a goal requires
a necessary degree of sacrifice. It certainly requires focus, cumulative
effort directed toward a tangible outcome, and more than 4 hours a week.

Everything is an adventure for Ferris, but it's an adventure without direction
or destination. It is an eternal, guilt-free spring break, bankrolled by ad
hoc projects and detachment from any forms of obligation. That may indeed be
an improvement over cubicle slavery for most readers. But it'll still be a
fundamentally hollow existence for anyone inclined to build or seek meaning.

~~~
potatolicious
> _"It is an eternal, guilt-free spring break, bankrolled by ad hoc projects
> and detachment from any forms of obligation."_

I stopped reading here. Where do I sign?

> _"This can be a legacy, or a company, or children, or a work of art, or
> essentially anything that outlasts the expiration of one's body and mind."_

I disagree completely that a legacy is a necessary component of having led a
fulfilled life - even though I personally seek to leave behind some legacy
myself. That said, how _hasn't_ Ferris left a legacy? He's published something
that's been read by more people than just about any of us would ever achieve
in our lives, and that's at age 33.

The best most of us can hope for is to influence a few people in the form of
children.

In my experience, "eye on the prize" styles of living is the surest way to
miss out on all the flowers along the road.

------
zwieback
It's always about the guru - never about the content. Sure, the specifics
change to adapt to current needs but fundamentally you'd be better off
listening to what your mother told you. However, the guru is so much more
interesting and, well, not your mother.

There's something about listening to someone else confirm what you already
knew about yourself deep down. If it's put into eloquent terms you'll have a
name to put to your yearnings and then, maybe, you'll end up doing something
about it. More likely you'll read the book and then sell it back to the Book
Bin when the next guru appears.

~~~
raganwald

      There's something about listening to someone else confirm
      what you already knew about yourself deep down.
    

Is that it? Or is it: _There's something about listening to someone else
confirm what you WANT TO BELIEVE about yourself deep down?_

~~~
zwieback
Not an either-or. Both are alluring.

------
bitwize
I don't think any generation deserved L. Ron Hubbard.

------
cvander
Every startup could use a co-founder like Tim Ferris to make a project become
mainstream.

Don't get me wrong. I read some of his books and didn't change my life. But it
made me think harder about how to promote and sell my ideas and myself.

