Not quite sure whether this is a rationality quote—I do not completely understand it, but Charlie Munger said this (in a Bloomberg interview), so at the very least it’s food for thought.
I fixed one of the flaw in my life, having tantrums, at four or five, for the rest of the flaws I balanced them with opposite virtues.
Not quite sure whether this is a rationality quote—I do not completely understand it
A good rule of thumb is that if you aren’t sure whether or not a quote is valuable… discard it. Quotes are the sort of thing that can be constructed to sound deep and be persuasive even when they are bullshit. So only accept them if you already understand in detail exactly what the reasoning is and find the quote just serves as a concise reminder of the theory.
I agree in general, but having read quite a bit of Munger I have a low prior on him saying something that’s deep BS. I prefer to keep things like this filed until a possible moment when the blanks fill themselves.
I don’t think you need a separate rule, having a prior covers it.
What Mungers statement makes me think of is an alternative approach to weakness; I think the default approach for many people is to “improve themselves”. In many cases this might just not be worth the time; looking for an imperfect “opposite virtue” might be workable. E.g. if life demands you to rise early instead of trying to become an “early riser” get an alarm that works and move on.
Not quite sure whether this is a rationality quote—I do not completely understand it, but Charlie Munger said this (in a Bloomberg interview), so at the very least it’s food for thought.
A good rule of thumb is that if you aren’t sure whether or not a quote is valuable… discard it. Quotes are the sort of thing that can be constructed to sound deep and be persuasive even when they are bullshit. So only accept them if you already understand in detail exactly what the reasoning is and find the quote just serves as a concise reminder of the theory.
I agree in general, but having read quite a bit of Munger I have a low prior on him saying something that’s deep BS. I prefer to keep things like this filed until a possible moment when the blanks fill themselves.
I agree with wedrifid in principle, but there’s an opposing rule of thumb that if Charlie Munger said it, it’s probably rational.
This may be related to flaw balancing.
I don’t think you need a separate rule, having a prior covers it.
What Mungers statement makes me think of is an alternative approach to weakness; I think the default approach for many people is to “improve themselves”. In many cases this might just not be worth the time; looking for an imperfect “opposite virtue” might be workable. E.g. if life demands you to rise early instead of trying to become an “early riser” get an alarm that works and move on.