While Dalio's Principles is admirable, there's a "stated preferences" vs "revealed preferences" thing going on. Principles is probably his aspiration, but his reality is quite different.
Not to say that his ideas are invalid - they do offer a interesting path to self-mastery. But I'm not able to take Dalio himself as seriously after reading the book!
Personally, I got bored with Ray Dalios book and put it down. No offence to him, most books struggle to hold my attention.
There is some value, however, in thinking in terms of algorithms. What’s funny, or perhaps unsurprising, is that many of the most successful people have the same first step: have a clear goal.
If we cannot get that right, the next steps do not matter much.
Sometimes books wander too far along, the core message can be told in 5 big points but 350 pages are filled, when 50 or 100 maximum would do. But with Dalio, I find something almost on every page.
A clear goal is absolutely essential, many do not have that.
I live this conflict of the’'Two Yous’ less as a battle but simply as the paradox we live being a human. Throughout even our daily life, we lead towards one side or the other, sometimes moment by moment, for that paradox is never solvable; it is determined in the moment through ongoing discipline, strengthened through mediation.
Dalio’s book "Principles" is a worthwhile read, but it is not for the faint of heart . It insists the reader engage in self reflection. If one merely READS but doesn’t consider what to DO with the ideas, it is worthless.All worthy books ask us to engage in this reflection, to synthesize our own understanding, to question the methodology, and to consider how to integrate it into personal practices. Accepting failure as First Attempt At Learning, and engaging in reflective correction is that first step, as Dalio demonstrates in his own life.
I handle the paradox we have as humans, like Dalio, through daily meditation. The Metaphor of it as a circuit breaker is interesting. In a moment between choices, a person who practices meditation will internally throw the circuit breaker when they are wandering away from who they want to become, despite the challenges .
Pondering this electrical metaphor, I wonder if meditation as resistor might be useful as well. It a core component of the electrical unit, unlike the circuit breaker. Within us, through our meditation practice, we embed this resistor in the series pathway. We can add and remove them at will, unlike a circuit breaker.
I completely agree with your wonderful reframing of the "Two Yous" being less of a battle and more of an unsolvable, fundamental paradox of being human. Viewing it as something to be managed "moment by moment, through ongoing discipline" is a much more practical and realistic approach than aiming for a one-time victory over our emotional selves. I like this a lot. Totally present and connected.
And your extension of the electrical metaphor is just brilliant. The "circuit breaker" captures the emergency-stop aspect of meditation when we are about to get hijacked by the amygdala. But the "resistor" is a more subtle and powerful idea. It's not just a fail-safe; it's a core component for modulating the current of thought and emotion, which implies a constant, deliberate practice of managing our internal voltage rather than just preventing a short-circuit. The idea that we can consciously add or remove these resistors based on the situation is a perfect description of how that discipline works in practice.
Yes, we ought to reflect and consider what to do. This is why I practice reading and writing my thoughts on books, what are the key messages that I can do. Stay curious.
I'm pleased you resonated with the resistor idea. Your extension of that metaphor captures our need for have a consistent and deliberate discipline of where we need to place them. In some areas, we are less likely to be swayed to the emotional. It depends on our individual inclinations, and temptations.
I often smile at your exhortation to Stay curious. My emails end with Live Life in Crescendo, which aligns with Stay Curious. Remaining curious in our lives is essential to living a life in crescendo. Both are a a reminder to be aware of our time and place in our society, and to engage with both its beauty and its challenges.
Yes, one way to remain curious and to discipline ourselves is through thoughtful reading and writing. It is why I appreciate your reviews on new books. I have a book reflection journal, where I ponder the content, to make the key knowledge mine. All writing intersects and interplays with our unsolvable, fundamental paradox of being human. For me, that is what makes being human invigorating.
While Dalio's Principles is admirable, there's a "stated preferences" vs "revealed preferences" thing going on. Principles is probably his aspiration, but his reality is quite different.
Rob Copeland's book, "The Fund" shows a very different Dalio: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/ray-dalio-rob-copeland-the-fund-book-excerpt.html. I could not put down this book - it was simultaneously hilarious, shocking, and eye-opening.
Not to say that his ideas are invalid - they do offer a interesting path to self-mastery. But I'm not able to take Dalio himself as seriously after reading the book!
Personally, I got bored with Ray Dalios book and put it down. No offence to him, most books struggle to hold my attention.
There is some value, however, in thinking in terms of algorithms. What’s funny, or perhaps unsurprising, is that many of the most successful people have the same first step: have a clear goal.
If we cannot get that right, the next steps do not matter much.
Sometimes books wander too far along, the core message can be told in 5 big points but 350 pages are filled, when 50 or 100 maximum would do. But with Dalio, I find something almost on every page.
A clear goal is absolutely essential, many do not have that.
The biggest offender, for me, is Amartya Sen. He writes in entire chapters what could be said in one paragraph.
Wonderful post!
Thank you Cathie
Interesting article, as always.
I live this conflict of the’'Two Yous’ less as a battle but simply as the paradox we live being a human. Throughout even our daily life, we lead towards one side or the other, sometimes moment by moment, for that paradox is never solvable; it is determined in the moment through ongoing discipline, strengthened through mediation.
Dalio’s book "Principles" is a worthwhile read, but it is not for the faint of heart . It insists the reader engage in self reflection. If one merely READS but doesn’t consider what to DO with the ideas, it is worthless.All worthy books ask us to engage in this reflection, to synthesize our own understanding, to question the methodology, and to consider how to integrate it into personal practices. Accepting failure as First Attempt At Learning, and engaging in reflective correction is that first step, as Dalio demonstrates in his own life.
I handle the paradox we have as humans, like Dalio, through daily meditation. The Metaphor of it as a circuit breaker is interesting. In a moment between choices, a person who practices meditation will internally throw the circuit breaker when they are wandering away from who they want to become, despite the challenges .
Pondering this electrical metaphor, I wonder if meditation as resistor might be useful as well. It a core component of the electrical unit, unlike the circuit breaker. Within us, through our meditation practice, we embed this resistor in the series pathway. We can add and remove them at will, unlike a circuit breaker.
Thank you Wendy.
I completely agree with your wonderful reframing of the "Two Yous" being less of a battle and more of an unsolvable, fundamental paradox of being human. Viewing it as something to be managed "moment by moment, through ongoing discipline" is a much more practical and realistic approach than aiming for a one-time victory over our emotional selves. I like this a lot. Totally present and connected.
And your extension of the electrical metaphor is just brilliant. The "circuit breaker" captures the emergency-stop aspect of meditation when we are about to get hijacked by the amygdala. But the "resistor" is a more subtle and powerful idea. It's not just a fail-safe; it's a core component for modulating the current of thought and emotion, which implies a constant, deliberate practice of managing our internal voltage rather than just preventing a short-circuit. The idea that we can consciously add or remove these resistors based on the situation is a perfect description of how that discipline works in practice.
Yes, we ought to reflect and consider what to do. This is why I practice reading and writing my thoughts on books, what are the key messages that I can do. Stay curious.
I'm pleased you resonated with the resistor idea. Your extension of that metaphor captures our need for have a consistent and deliberate discipline of where we need to place them. In some areas, we are less likely to be swayed to the emotional. It depends on our individual inclinations, and temptations.
I often smile at your exhortation to Stay curious. My emails end with Live Life in Crescendo, which aligns with Stay Curious. Remaining curious in our lives is essential to living a life in crescendo. Both are a a reminder to be aware of our time and place in our society, and to engage with both its beauty and its challenges.
Yes, one way to remain curious and to discipline ourselves is through thoughtful reading and writing. It is why I appreciate your reviews on new books. I have a book reflection journal, where I ponder the content, to make the key knowledge mine. All writing intersects and interplays with our unsolvable, fundamental paradox of being human. For me, that is what makes being human invigorating.
I think he is probably right about AI . He was right about China in his earlier book but gave them too much power
I agree with you Ken, his study of history has led him into making some astute forecasts, even if the dates are a bit wrong!
Most intriguing. It reminds me much of what's taught in physics or chemistry - proof by contradiction.
Proof by contradiction, the best explanation.