A lot of the meaning that people find in their lives is purpose driven.

And in order to put effort into something, to work towards something, you have to assume

axiomatically that what you're working towards is better than what you have.

Because why else would you do it?

And there's a relationship, like, if it's way better than what you have, it's obviously

proportionally difficult.

So you try to balance difficulty with positivity, let's say, something like that.

But you're always aiming up if you're aiming.

And if you're not aiming then you don't really have any purpose, and that deprives

your life of meaning, and that's not good because if your life is deprived of meaning

then what you're left with is the suffering.

It's not neutral, right, it's negative.

So now the problem with having to aim up is that produces a hierarchy, because if you

posit and aim then everyone arrays themselves along a hierarchy of “better at it” to

“worse at it”.

And it doesn't matter—if you create basketball as a game, 100 years later you create people

who are hyperspecialized at basketball and they're great at it, and virtually everyone

else is bad.

So it doesn't matter.

As soon as you produce a value proposition, you produce a hierarchy.

The problem with a hierarchy is it produces inequality.

The problem with inequality is it produces resentment.

Right, but you can't get rid of the damn hierarchy just because they produce inequality

and resentment, because then you don't have anywhere to go.

So that's not an answer.

Okay, so let's say you're trying to deal with the fact that you have to put up with

a hierarchy if you're going to have any values.

Well, how do you escape from the resentment trap?

And the answer is you do an intelligent multidimensional analysis of your life.

It's like, by the time you're 30, I would say, you're a pretty singular person.

You're unique and particular and your life has multiple dimensions.

And you're more or less successful—or not—along many of those dimensions.

But it's a completely ridiculous game to pick someone else arbitrarily, who's doing

much better than you on one of those dimensions, to assume that you're a failure because

of that, or that the world is unfair because of that, without knowing in full detail all

of the rest of the elements of their lives.

I mean, look, we're absolutely awash in stories of unhappy celebrities mired in interminable

divorces or in affairs or in addictions.

And that's par for the course.

It's not helpful.

It's helpful to have a goal.

It's necessary to have a hierarchy.

It's not particularly useful to compare yourself to other people.

But it is useful to compare yourself to yourself.

That's the right baseline, right?

That takes everything else into account.

And it's really practically useful.

And I've done this in my clinical practice very frequently.

It's like okay, let's take stock of where you are and then let's hypothesize about

where you would like to be.

It's a complex conversation because we want to figure out what's not so good about your

present situation—exactly, precisely—and then come up with a hypothesis about what

your life would look like if it was better.

And then we can work on incremental improvement.

And the idea would be there's some step you could take, that you would take, that

would make today or tomorrow fractionally better than yesterday.

And then you can iterate that.

And that's actually unbelievably powerful.

You hit the effect of compounding interest, let's say, very, very rapidly if you do

that.

So there's real utility in incremental progress.

And you don't have to improve your life much in increments to start hitting the effect

of compounding interest.

You make one thing slightly better, and that increases the probability that you'll make

the next thing slightly better—as well as having its positive side effects.

And so even if you make small steps forward and you do that regularly, that can turn your

life around very rapidly over a one- to two-year period.

I mean, that's a long time, one to two years, but it's not a lifetime.

And it certainly beats the hell out of going downhill precipitously, which tends to be

the alternative.

It's better and it keeps you out of the resentment, you know.

It's also more realistic because it's not like everyone else doesn't have their

problems.

You know, we have these fictitious, successful people that it's easy for us to compare

ourselves to detrimentally and to become jealous and bitter about that, but also to be very

hard on ourselves because we're not successful.

If you talk to successful people, let's say—and I'm not trying to say that there's

no such thing as genuine accomplishment because obviously there is—but even people who are

successful have lives that are very difficult, and they have an ill family member or aged

parents or they're suffering from some serious illness themselves which is very, very common.

Or they have a psychological problem that's not trivial or they have traumatic past.

It's like—life is brutal.

And becoming resentful about your relative position is a way to make it more brutal.

It's not helpful to you, and it's not helpful to anyone else.