jabv

I think you meant... crappy content aggregator -> crappy content aggregator -> crappy content aggregator -> crappy content aggregator -> acceptable content aggregator

And in a fun twist, what you mention is 99% of the reason for 99% of degree requirements on a position (yes, some positions truly do require years of specific background education) -- it's the best evidence a company has on an inexperienced person that the person can persevere.

My company is hiring; email me and I'll look at your stuff and make a decision about recommending you.

This perspective on the bible and Latin is not a good analogy. Most people could not read any language long ago, and priests in general serve several other purposes before reading/expounding upon the bible. From the standpoint of a believer, the bible was not expanded by human decision as laws are (canonical vs. apocryphal discussions aside). The bible was compiled in Latin by Jerome because it was the common ('vulgar') language of the people.

Of course, there's plenty to discuss and argue about in all of the above, but your comparison makes it seem like a done deal.

I am probably even less worthy of offering a summary of the book than you are, but I'll take a stab as well.

The author is interested in how meaning can arise from meaningless components. For example, any one cell in the brain doesn't seem to have awareness, intelligence, etc. -- so why is it that a brain's worth does seem to have these abilities? To take it further, one could consider the constituent atoms and such.

There are analogies with music, visual art, and more subjects. How is it that a single musical note conveys so little, yet certain arrangements convey so much?

The author has a rough idea about how this happens. He thinks this event (meaning arising from meaningless parts) is the core scientific-philosophical question for developing strong AI.

I'm sorry, is your argument based on the current year? I presume you mean otherwise, but that's how it's written.

As an aside, I don't think "the most predatory thing" about student loans is the fixed cost regardless of profit. The same could be said of any business or real estate loan. The most predatory thing about student loans is that there's barely any rational qualification of the loan recipient.

Hmm, so would a flat tax rate actually be progressive? ;)

One way of thinking about EQ includes self-awareness and self-management as components of your overall EQ (which may also include understanding others, for example).

So, being aware of this is good. Being aware that you are causing the issues you face is great.

However, you seem to have the attitude (from this limited sample) that this is a concrete fact of life (that's my understanding from your post).

If you're aware that some aspect of your "over friendly nature" takes away from your ability to lead your team effectively, and you don't adjust, you're not practicing sound self-management, which is an important aspect of EQ (just like some folks need to be aware that they become angered easily and adjust accordingly).

My advice is to pretend like you came to yourself for advice with your current situation. Using your ability to understand others, what would you advise? What practices should change? You may find that this exercise will give you more "next steps" than will other folks taking stabs in the dark online.

A final thought is this. You care about your team being effective and satisfied with their leadership. Currently, you aren't providing what they need. You're actually not displaying excellent EQ in this way. How can you put aside your natural tendencies to offer your team what they need?

Sorry for the late reply, but most resources I know about would get more specific about particular morality of the religion. If that's what you're looking for, you should get plenty of results searching for "Catholic examination of conscience."

In Catholicism (and probably in some other religions), there is a practice of an "examination of conscience." It has helped me to make improvements of the kind you refer to.

Basically, the essence is to take 5 minutes at the very end of the day to think back through each hour of the day, perhaps with a couple of focus questions (eg "did I become angry, even internally"). You use your will to sincerely regret anything that you think was wrong, and maybe use a bit of problem solving to see how it could have gone differently.

Five minutes at the end of the day (maybe it stays on your mind as you sleep? but that's just my bro-science) every day for a month should help you make some small steps.

I don't intend to mock you -- I am sure there is much more relevant context to your life decisions, and they're your own, anyway.

However, I have observed friends seemingly get caught in a pattern: go to a top school, so you can have a high-paying job, so you can afford to send kids to a top school, so they can get high-paying jobs, so that...

In some folks' lives, the value of the "top school" seems to have a circular definition (not true for all folks, of course). It's a little sad, because by breaking out of that pattern, many more possibilities open up (like working in important and fascinating science for lower pay).

"What one practice, if removed from your day/week, would hurt you the most?" (be ready with a follow up question if he just says "eat" or "sleep" or whatever - "do you approach that in an intentional way? have you had to tune how you do that?")

"Is there anything I should be asking, but I'm not?" - has occasionally yielded interesting responses for me.