frozenmoose93 said:I’m not settling for anything less than a perfect match. I can't stand lukewarm connections, whether we're talking friendship or romance. I’m strictly looking for people who actually click, even if it takes me my whole life to find them.🙂 Better off alone than stuck with someone who just doesn't fit.
Look, I get that 100% compatibility is a myth, but hitting 70-80%? That should be doable. Maybe most people think that’s unrealistic, but honestly, what's more unrealistic to me than seeing couples stay together for 10 years and then just suddenly call it quits?! Like, what were you even doing all that time?! Or how about people jumping straight from one relationship to another without even getting to know the next person first. So many people rush into these things based purely on physical attraction and sex, and once that spark dies down, the whole "relationship" just evaporates. 🙄
If everyone actually went after a high-quality partner, there wouldn't be nearly as many miserable people out there. Everyone talks about "tolerating" each other, but let's be real—that's usually just a fancy word for hypocrisy. If someone isn't right for you, why put up with it?! I have zero interest in wasting my time or my sanity on people I don't vibe with. Character compatibility is the only real foundation for a solid, long-term relationship, and eventually, the love follows. It’s that simple. Too bad so few people seem to get it...
Well, obviously you should aim for compatibility, but that’s a far cry from demanding perfection. And besides, how are you even supposed to measure compatibility in percentages?! How do you calculate that someone is exactly 80 percent compatible with you...?? 😕 The truth is, a ton of relationships are built on looks, money, status, or just being able to tolerate someone else's nonsense... but I doubt those types of people will ever truly realize that their connections are hollow. They just fall into these patterns because maybe that's what they're looking for, and they don't know any better. If someone figures it out later in life, hey, better late than never... but you can't exactly convince a shallow person that they're shallow, because their entire worldview is too surface-level to even process it... anyway, I agree that you need to find someone you actually get along with; it's definitely better to be solo than to suffer through someone else's company just for the sake of it...
Nicole Barrett76 said:And old age is particularly daunting, isn't it? You have lived through your prime, your physical vitality begins to wane, and you find yourself with neither much time remaining nor any realistic hope for sweeping improvements to your circumstances...
How terrible!
The sole redeeming quality of such an era is the vast reservoir of life experience one has gathered, which can be offered to the younger generations—provided they possess even the slightest willingness to listen.
And even if they don't listen, I guess you can at least feel a bit important or smug about everything you've been through, traveling all over the place. Plus, if someone managed to land a solid pension, they can definitely live it up. Though for some old folks, just existing is enough of a luxury...
Then again, kids are pretty happy because they have zero clue about how much stuff is actually going wrong around them. To them, "evil" is just a cartoon witch, or having homework, or Mom losing her cool on you. Looking back, when I was little, I hated how everything was constantly being restricted, or how people were always trying to teach me "discipline" and all that crap. And man, those moments when adults talk down to you like you're an idiot... you ask why you can't do something, and the only answer you get is "because I said so!" Ugh, that used to drive me absolutely insane...
I mean, who actually says you have to be completely detached and cold toward everyone just to live in total isolation?! :/ I honestly think you can live a normal life, though I guess it might be a little easier in certain situations if you’re just fully aware of how fleeting everything is... how insignificant we all are, how small we really are, and that whole sense of being unattached to it all...
Robert Diaz2 As I have previously observed—and I tend to be quite certain about these matters—there is an underlying truth here that most people seem to overlook in their haste to reach a conclusion. It isn't merely about the surface level of the argument; rather, it is about the structural integrity of the logic being presented. One must look closer. What Nancy Wilson2 suggested holds some weight—it really does. People tend to rush into relationships out of pure, unadulterated fear. There is the dread of being alone, the terror of mortality, and everything in between. It becomes a desperate flight into various distractions, all just to avoid having to confront those truths directly.
Love is, as any rational observer understands, nothing more than a series of chemical reactions firing within the brain. It is, quite frankly, the ultimate glitch in the Matrix—a grand illusion designed to manufacture hype and lead humanity straight into a state of voluntary servitude. This is precisely why our entire culture—from Hollywood blockbusters to the top of the Billboard charts—is so relentlessly saturated with themes of romance and affection. There is this pervasive, systemic pressure everywhere you look to conform to the standard model of being in a relationship or tied down in marriage.
Good heavens—it appears there are actually people in this corner of the internet who perceive the world through the same lens I do. 🙏 But let’s be clear—not everyone possesses the insight to grasp the situation, nor does everyone have the vision to see things for what they truly are.
Elizabeth Castillo87, you hit the nail on the head—it is precisely the clergy and the religious types who have taken this concept and inflated it through sheer mystification and romanticism. It isn't just Hollywood, poets, or philosophers either. I recall an old debate I had with Camelot where I made the exact same point that Robert Diaz2 just raised; his response was to suggest I wasn't quite right in the head and should perhaps seek professional help. He leaned heavily into that nonsense about love being a fire in the soul, dew upon the face, or even having Jesus himself residing within a person. We are still dealing with that same brand of absurdity today. I have also heard the notion that love is simply the conscious presence of the self—which is actually a rather elegant thought—but it stems from conscious experiences where the organism is fully relaxed. We know for a fact that oxytocin can be released during such states, which explains those intense feelings of love that certain meditators happen to experience.
Reality is a fickle thing—it encompasses everything that actually exists—and this pervasive notion that "everything is love" is nothing more than a hollow declaration used to justify even the atrocities committed by Hitler. If we accept the premise that love is the sum total of all existence, then we are forced into some rather grim conclusions. Is love found in a man rotting away in his own suffering? Is the act of shooting an innocent child in the head considered an act of love? If one insists that everything is love, and that the entirety of reality is composed of it, then yes—hate becomes love, the deepest depths of depression become love, and even the act of suicide becomes the ultimate expression of love, simply because love is supposedly everything and within everything.
Everything stems from the inherent nature and subsequent impact of those emotional states—it isn't just poetic fluff. It’s a documented phenomenon, really; people don't just say the sky looks more vibrant when you're in love without having a reason. But just because things may appear that way—it doesn't mean they actually are. People tend to take that specific term—which, if you look at the name itself, carries this almost sanctified, hollow glow—and stretch its definition to cover just about anything. It’s a bit much, frankly. While poetic, romantic, or abstract language might serve a purpose in art, it is fundamentally ill-suited for describing objective reality. Such phrasing is meant for subjective experiences—those fleeting, deeply personal perceptions that belong to the individual alone. Just because your heart rate spikes from an adrenaline rush doesn't mean love originates in the chest; biology doesn't care about our metaphors. But then again, people misinterpret just about everything, usually twisting facts to fit whatever narrative suits them best. This single point of contention opens up far too many unnecessary debates and endless, circular definitions.
Quentin Tarantino
When people speak of the "oldness of the soul," they are almost certainly referring to maturity. Yet, maturity isn't a byproduct of age—not necessarily. It is more accurately a result of experience and, more importantly, how we choose to react to those experiences. That said, if someone is older, one might assume they have accumulated more life lessons—essentially, more time spent carving the raw wood of character into a "perfect" shape. We all possess distinct personalities shaped by varying degrees of pressure; some were molded harshly, others more gently, some extensively, others barely at all. There are simply too many nuances and individual variations to make any sense of categorizing people.
So, you’re mostly talking about being infatuated rather than actually loving someone. What happens when two people move past that initial rush? Does that mean there's no more racing hearts or butterflies or any of that other crap? What about when friends love each other? Or when parents love a kid who treats them like absolute garbage, but they still love them anyway? Or when someone actually donates a kidney to another person? Is that all just brain chemistry? Are we just being driven by chemicals to give a lady a kidney or jump under a subway train to save someone's life or, I don't know, forgive someone for the worst possible things they've ever done?
I mean, baby souls are obviously more tethered to the other side, which is probably why they seem so freaking lost in this one. You think maybe people with severe cognitive disabilities could be considered baby souls? Or even animals? Because, you know, they aren't exactly equipped for those deep, existential crises about being alive... it’s more just pure instinct at that point.
But honestly, I don't think we should get too hung up on the material world. Don't get me wrong, we all get attached during our lives—to a specific city, to certain objects, or even to people, who are technically part of the physical world too... but life is just way easier to navigate if you realize everything is temporary. If you live like you're gonna stay forever, like nothing ever changes, like nobody’s ever gonna die, or like some massive conflict isn't gonna pop up tomorrow and wipe everything out... well, I don't know. Some guy might spend his entire life in one tiny town in rural Nebraska, totally unable to detach from that one spot, even if he went through hell there and actually had a chance to move to somewhere like Austin or Seattle to start over and live the life he actually wanted. But he's so stuck on that one place that he can't leave, and then twenty years later, he's just sitting there regretting he didn't bail sooner and crying about how it's too late... Or whatever... most people just hate change. And I'm not saying we need to flip our whole lives upside down every single day or constantly chase the next big thing, but most people just stick to their habits, and the second things get shaken up, they just lose their minds... you know... like some moms when their kids finally move out of the house—it's like the end of the world, "oh my god, my baby is leaving"... or you have people who just can't let the dead stay dead, for real, they just spend years and years mourning and burying themselves under that grief. Even with the people we love and want by our side forever, sometimes you just have to let them go follow their own path and grow, you don't necessarily have to be tied to them for your entire existence. And it goes for that shallow kind of materialism, too, like when someone gets obsessively attached to their car, or a piece of jewelry, or their phone, doesn't matter... like when someone dents their car and they're pissed off and acting like a jerk for days, or when they lose their phone and act like they lost a limb. Or, I don't know, losing your cool and snapping at someone because they scuffed your brand new hardwood floors... or even taking it out on your kid over something that stupid.
Jacob Sanchez7 said:Comfort? Since when did you need comfort?
See, when people start preaching that whole "you only live once" routine... if it turns out we actually get to go through this loop multiple times, then my conscience isn't going to be giving me any grief for just coasting through this life...😁
Justin Garcia7 said:Why do you believe everything you read without question? 😁 Where on earth are these spiritualists getting such specific insights and intimate details about the lives of souls? It’s an interesting read, but I wouldn't try to integrate this kind of knowledge into my life just yet. Honestly, I feel like an old soul—this is probably my final incarnation, and I'm looking forward to moving beyond this material world. Some people might be pushed away from their own path to happiness by this stuff. I've run into similar ideas before, like how "everything is experience" and the universe holds no grudges; even a killer has to go through the experience of being a killer. Personally, I don't buy into absolute predestination. Everyone has the free will to make their own choices and the power to change their lives through their own efforts.
Well, it’s interesting and it’s comforting, damn it. And obviously, what can regular people actually know about the afterlife and all that jazz? But then again, you hear those stories, like little kids talking about their past lives and whatnot... But yeah, nobody could possibly track the entire trajectory of a single soul—what they were up to in their youth, their prime, or their twilight years... but it’s still fascinating, isn't it? 🙂
casualtiger2 said:That’s pretty depressing. 😢 So many lifetimes, so much effort, and it all leads to nothing. Honestly, it’s no wonder nobody wants to reach enlightenment—who would actually want to become a detached, cold, opportunistic, hollowed-out retiree who doesn't care about anything and is just counting the days until they check out? 🤷
PS Or am I just misinterpreting the whole thing? 😍
but why would it be sad, man? 😁 I mean, it doesn't mean people are totally depressed or hate being alive, or that they're waking up every day praying for the end... I think most people are actually living pretty damn happy lives, they just aren't sprinting after the same hollow stuff that younger souls obsess over. Maybe they’d rather spend their time gardening, making art, cooking, singing in a choir, or whatever else... 😁doesn't really matter.. And if you look at it another way, it kind of makes sense that evolution moves in that direction, because if we’re all essentially spiritual beings, the ultimate goal can’t be getting obsessed with material junk or thinking you've peaked when you've successfully manipulated a bunch of people just to stack more cash...
rustymaker5 said:heh, I’ve got a nagging feeling about this whole Level 7 thing... I mean, it just doesn't sit right with me, how can someone like a high-ranking politician, or a career soldier, or even a priest, be such highly evolved souls while simultaneously causing so much absolute chaos and wreckage throughout the world 😁 ...
I mean, look, if someone is supposedly some kind of "old soul" icon, that doesn't automatically make them a career politician—that was just an example... they could be a spiritual leader, or even just a mom who’s got that slightly overbearing, intense vibe, but is still fundamentally an old soul at heart...
So there are these seven archetypes—the king, the artist, the soldier, the comedian, the servant, the priest, and the student.
And basically, age just layers on top of these soul categories. I’m not entirely sure if being an artist means you’re stuck being one through every single reincarnation... doesn't really feel like that, does it? Like, a king is just... a king. We're talking dominant types, natural-born leaders, people who actually make decisions. Could be a Senator or even some high-level mob boss in Chicago or something... Then you have the servant—people who don't spend much of their lives living for themselves or their own needs, they're more focused on everyone else, super caring, really hospitable... The artist—they just live for creativity, expressing themselves, being original, sensitive, and totally immersed in that world... The student—always hungry for knowledge, soaking up info like a sponge. In a group, they're usually the ones everyone turns to when some massive, complicated mess needs solving. They stay neutral, curious, and pretty analytical... The comedian—lives to make people laugh, loves being the center of attention, super witty and original, though they can definitely veer into being way too dramatic sometimes. Just charming and fun to be around... The warriors—these are the action people. They get things moving and they fight hard. Strong characters, but they usually follow someone else's lead—like the kings—and they're incredibly loyal... The priests—the ones teaching others about the true nature of the soul. They inspire people, act as motivators, and see the big picture as visionaries...
Just to be clear, these aren't ranked from "lowest" to "highest," they're all on the same level. And the same goes for age; it's not like old souls are somehow better than young ones or vice versa. Everything exists in this world for a reason, and it all works together to make reality what it is. Everyone has a part to play. Some people change the world, some write the rules, some fight for the greater good, and then there's the crowd just causing absolute chaos for no damn reason at all...😁 so yeah, something like that.
Look, it isn’t some linear progression from baby to king or whatever... it’s more about age stages—baby, child, young, mature, and old, with maybe five or seven levels within each category... And hey, nobody ever said one lifetime was enough to clear a single level! Honestly, it feels like if you start out in a baby phase—say, you become some kind of hitman or something—you’re going to have to grind through a hell of a lot of life just to pay off all those delusions you had and actually grow up a bit... so, I guess some souls that develop a little faster might make it through in, say, 40 or 50 reincarnations, but most people definitely need way more than that... As far as I’m concerned, I fall squarely into the old soul category. Well, except for that intense eye contact thing and the fact that I felt older even when I was a kid (I actually used to feel younger, but once I hit my early 20s, I started feeling way older than my actual age most of the time). Even though there are certain situations where I can see myself acting like a young or mature soul, it’s pretty rare. And then I just end up looking stuck-up 😁 but whatever, that's just how it goes. Plus, most people I know would probably fit into the young, child, or maybe a mix of young and mature souls. And according to this theory of theirs, those types should be the most common ones on the planet...
Anyway, I’ll try to summarize how I figured all this out in plain English. 1. Baby souls: These are folks who just started living on Earth; they’re lost, they don't really get how the world works, so they mostly just screw things up. Or they were born into circumstances where survival is the only goal—people point to psychopaths, or likely people with mental health issues or things like autism, and they also mention people from various indigenous tribes, though I don't buy that much because just because someone doesn't live in a high-rise with electricity and running water doesn't mean their soul is primitive. But fine...
2. Child souls: They crave order, hard work, and discipline. Basically, they're sheep; they tend to blindly follow a religion (like die-hard Catholics or hardcore Islamists, etc.) or maybe a specific political party. Generally, they lean heavily on rules, aren't particularly tolerant, and think everything needs to follow a specific order (like God's laws, the laws of nature, whatever). They could also be Nazis, but most often they're just regular working-class people who just want to live, work, and keep everything nice, mediocre, and normal...
3. Young souls: They act like teenagers or young adults in general—they crave fame, wealth, status, travel, events; they’re active, and a "normal" life seems boring to them, so they're constantly chasing something bigger and better. They’re often superficial and driven by money, though they can also be driven by, say, a thirst for knowledge. They tend to think about themselves more than others, the community, the world, or anything else. And it seems to me these people aren't usually very spiritual; they don't believe in anything they haven't seen with their own eyes... Most of them are celebrities, actors, singers, wealthy CEOs, and stuff like that... They also frequently don't belong to any religion because they think it's stupid, unlike child souls who blindly follow whatever they're told. Also, they consider their own opinion more important and better than anyone else's. Maybe they'll listen to you, but you won't convince them they're wrong, because they already know best...
4. Mature souls: These souls have realized that it’s not all about the money, the fame, partying around the world, or indulging every gourmet craving... they realize other people exist, that we are all actually equal, and that we need to be treated fairly. They get pissed off at the state of the world and try to do something to change it—protesting for certain rights, protesting against animal cruelty, etc. Often, they are mentally struggling and deal with various psychological issues—depression, schizophrenia, different phobias, and all that... Still, they are the ones bringing positive changes to this world—just as young souls might advance technology, science, or expand businesses, mature souls try to show people they're wrong, that injustice exists, that we have to fight it, that the planet is suffering, etc. But the world is full of young and child souls who just ignore them or laugh them off...
5. Old souls: In the beginning stages, they're still somewhat similar to mature souls, but they become less and less attached to the material world. They've given up on fighting for the greater good or anything of the sort. In their middle stage, they might be spiritual leaders or figures like Mother Teresa, and in their final stage, they’re just phlegmatic retirees waiting to kick the bucket. They have no desire for material things, fame, status, travel, nothing. They often don't fit into society, not because they're trying to be "different" or because they're insecure, but because they feel they outgrew it a long time ago—all this chasing after things, happiness, or fulfilling some personal desires. Most of the time they live laid back, take the path of least resistance, aren't criminals, and in 99% of cases, they never become famous. They might even seem cold toward others; they see the big picture and how none of this actually matters. It’s almost like they know their reincarnation cycle on this Earth is coming to an end soon, so they aren't that attached to this world. Just like baby souls are heavily tied to the spiritual world and find this one unfamiliar and lost... old souls aren't lost, because they've lived through it all already, they're just over it...
I’m honestly not even sure if there’s an English version floating around somewhere out there, because I haven't had any luck hunting one down... and man, the thought of trying to translate this whole mess myself sounds absolutely exhausting.
If you’re looking for perfection, you’re just gonna end up alone or staring at a wall. Look, man, you can spend your entire life chasing some impossible ideal—searching for someone who thinks exactly like you or mirrors your every move—or you can finally get real and realize that kind of stuff just doesn't exist in the real world... Seriously, if you actually believe you can’t be a complete human being without finding some "other half" who’s basically your twin, then you haven't actually found yourself yet, let alone a partner. Every person needs to be able to function on their own, even if it’s just for a while, damn it (I mean, obviously we need people for reproduction and basic safety, the whole social thing, whatever)... but I honestly think if you actually managed to find someone who agreed with your every single thought, you’d be bored out of your mind and totally disappointed... So, bottom line? If you want someone identical to you, go buy a mirror and have fun with that. But if you actually want a life partner, you gotta accept that everyone is different, you aren't going to see eye-to-eye on everything, and two people are never going to have the exact same worldview or opinion on every little thing...
What kind of struggle are we even talking about here? People generally get fired up when there’s actually a finish line in sight, like some prize or a tangible goal waiting at the end. But let’s be real, life isn't a trophy you win, and there isn't some grand, ultimate purpose baked into the universe... so if there is any kind of "struggle" happening, it's probably just you going toe-to-toe with yourself. It is what it is, I guess. Some days are wins, some days are losses... if you can nudge the needle even a little bit, then sure, put in the effort, but if the cards are dealt against you, there’s nothing left to do but take it. At the end of the day, we're all heading to the same grave anyway, so what's the big deal... unless we're talking literal survival, which is obviously a different beast entirely... but otherwise, eh, whatever.
They’ve got links at the bottom for all the different soul types too, if you're feeling adventurous enough to read through them.
I’m dying to know what you guys think about any of this... do you actually buy into this kind of thing or is it just nonsense? And more importantly, which type are you?
Honestly, I don't think I've ever come across a better breakdown of personality archetypes in my life. Usually, I'm the first person to roll my eyes at trying to shove people into little boxes, but somehow everything here just... clicked for me. 🤷 It just feels right, you know? I mean, obviously the percentages they throw out for how many people fall into each category are probably total BS, and that part where they try to guess which celebrity belongs to which soul type seems like pure guesswork to me 🙄 but the rest of it... man, I'm actually kind of obsessed... 🙏
Robert Harris5 said:Maybe I should just try explaining this through a more irrational lens?
Now, let me be clear—I never suggested that being a perfectionist automatically makes someone unintelligent. Not at all. In my view, we really have to distinguish between two different sides of the coin here. On one hand, you have what I’d call positive perfectionism. This is actually quite a productive trait; it involves being thorough, staying precise with your work, and setting high standards that are actually grounded in reality. It's about striving for excellence without losing your footing. On the other hand, there’s this negative side of perfectionism that seems much more prevalent these days, and frankly, it’s quite debilitating. It prevents people from functioning effectively in their daily lives. This version is characterized by setting these impossibly high, unrealistic goals that simply don't align with a person's actual capacity or circumstances. It's a cycle that just doesn't serve anyone. I don't necessarily believe that anyone struggling to solve their own problems is lacking intelligence, nor do I think happiness is reserved solely for the brilliant. It really all comes down to the nature of the struggle itself. Of course, if someone is genuinely distressed because they feel they lack physical beauty—perhaps obsessing over a perceived flaw in their appearance—you might question their judgment. Or perhaps you wouldn't? One could argue that such an obsession is simply a manifestation of perfectionism.
Martian7 actually mentioned that it’s a bit of a tough thing to explain. I certainly agree that someone dealing with those kinds of issues can still be a brilliant academic, though I just can't quite wrap my head around the idea that struggling to write a simple email wouldn't have something to do with their cognitive faculties.
Honestly, you're getting your wires crossed here. So, you're basically suggesting perfectionism is just some deep-seated insecurity or a desperate, futile attempt to fix things that are fundamentally broken? Like, what, are we talking about guys popping pills to try and fix their size, or girls caking on twenty pounds of makeup every morning just to hide a bad face or something?! 🤷 I wouldn't even call those people perfectionists... they're just insecure, or they have zero taste, or—in the case of the pill-poppers—they aren't exactly the brightest bulbs in the box...
Robert Harris5 said:I wouldn't say those two things are quite the same, though I'll admit my analogy might be a bit off. Regarding the drinking example: someone might know, or at least strongly suspect, that they'll feel terrible later, but they choose to drink specifically to unwind, blow off steam, or just enjoy a night out. That choice doesn't suddenly drop their IQ. Also, I have to disagree with the idea that someone with OCD is consciously choosing to wash their hands twice. If they truly recognized the behavior as irrational and had full control over it, why would they do it? My point is that they do it because they don't truly perceive the dysfunction—or rather, they lack the cognitive tools to override the impulse. In fact, certain types of obsessive-compulsive disorders actually stem from perfectionism itself.
So, what if someone is just being incredibly precise and thorough with their work because they can't stand leaving things half-baked or sloppy and messy... 🤷 how on earth can you label that as a sign of low intelligence? Are you seriously suggesting that anyone dealing with any kind of struggle in life is unintelligent just because they can't wrap their head around it or fix it? Does that mean only the geniuses out there are happy and satisfied with their lives, simply because they have the mental bandwidth to identify problems, solve them, and make perfect decisions every single time?! wtf😕
Robert Harris5 said:How would the ancient Romans have phrased the sentiment: "It is a deformity to boast of oneself"? 🙂 That’s exactly what I was thinking. You’re still keeping your cards close to the chest, aren't you? Fine, be that way. I’ll just stick to my guns and maintain that perfectionists generally lack the necessary cognitive bandwidth, which is why they end up getting so hopelessly bogged down in the weeds. It’s a cycle. For instance, when someone sits down to draft an email—or even just a quick post on a forum like this... 🙂 You know, I’ve been thinking about those people who spend thirty minutes obsessively checking over a single email before they finally hit send—assuming they even find the courage to click "send" at all. Honestly? It feels like a bit of a paradox. You’d think someone truly sharp would spot an error instantly, or realize there isn't one to begin with, rather than just spinning their wheels and wasting precious time. It reminds me of that classic trap of perfectionism, where someone sets these impossibly high, unrealistic standards for themselves and ends up making life absolutely miserable in the process. It’s a heavy way to live. Of course, I shouldn't paint everyone with the same brush. There’s a big difference between that kind of self-sabotage and the people who aim high but actually set goals that are attainable. One is a recipe for burnout, while the other is just... well, being ambitious.
That’s a fair point, I suppose. But honestly, how can you really be certain about someone’s actual IQ? In my mind, you can't truly claim to know where someone stands unless you've actually sat down and looked at their official test results. Otherwise, isn't it all just guesswork?
Intelligence and common sense are two completely different animals! obviously a perfectionist knows they're wasting time on trivial nonsense, but they're still gonna do it anyway... it's just like how someone with OCD knows it makes zero sense to wash their hands twice every single time they touch something, but they can't just stop themselves... saying perfectionists aren't smart is like saying people who get drunk and end up puking in a gutter are less intelligent—because if they were actually smart, they would have known they'd feel like crap and wouldn't have overdone it in the first place.
Being average doesn't have to be a bad thing. I mean, obviously, everyone wants to feel special or be some kind of outlier in their field, but at the end of the day... we all die anyway. And then you're just gone—nothing left to show for it, nothing done... You really should just live in a way where you can actually sleep at night and be somewhat carefree. But man, there are all sorts of people out there. Some guy's whole life goal is to be the CEO, run his own massive corporation, and sail around on a yacht... which means he's gotta find a way to stay "above average" (though in this country, that usually just boils down to being a shady crook or some other bullshit)... hmmm... Besides, there’s zero point in stressing yourself out trying to be the absolute best when there’s always going to be someone better out there. We shouldn't be pushing ourselves to the breaking point either, because what does it even matter if I'm the top performer at my company or the star student at NYU, if it just means I can't sleep, I'm constantly burnt out, and none of it actually matters in the grand scheme of things? :/
Honestly, we’re already cooked, I really don't think there's any saving us at this point. if you take a look at human history over the last couple thousand years, everything just keeps getting smaller and more superficial—except back in the day, slaves actually knew they were slaves, whereas today people think they’re free, even though they’re still basically just cogs in the machine. and most of that comes down to the media and all the constant manipulation, so by the end of it, people aren't even free to have their own thoughts... they’re just thinking whatever someone else decided they should be thinking for them. fuck a world like that. I mean, where does a person even start if you want to change anything? Everyone is just looking out for themselves, especially the ones with all the power and the deep pockets, and honestly, there’s nothing you can do against people like that. education is fine, I guess, assuming you’re actually teaching people how to think for themselves, but what do people actually learn in school? They just memorize stuff from textbooks and learn that whatever the teacher says is gospel, even when the professor is dead wrong. what people really need is to become a little more aware of their own mortality and how insignificant we all are in this massive universe (not that everyone needs to go kill themselves or stop caring about everything)... but still. You’re born, you live, you die. You were here, but it's like you weren't, and nobody cares. In 10, 20, or even 100 years, nobody is even going to know you existed (unless you’re some legendary inventor or something... but even then, so what? You might trigger some tiny bit of progress for humanity, which is already less than a speck of dust compared to the scale of space, and that's just that).