We can’t ever know all the factors that led to an outcome and by comparing ourselves to others in any domain we do so as if we could. This arrogance leads to conclusions that are unrealistic, and too often detrimental to one’s self-esteem and sense of empowerment.
Instead of comparing yourself to others, focus on improving your own life and making it as good as possible.
MORE IDEAS FROM THE ARTICLE
Enlighten yourself and focus on the issues at hand, always aiming for a better future. By doing so before acting you can properly identify who and where you are and then find out what to do.
If goals aren’t specified, the person will wander around in life with a dull ache of continued hopelessness and a vague sense of failure.
Refusing to acknowledge an issue is an issue in itself and worsens that you wish to ignore. The pain from failing to begin is greater than the one for trying and failing. So, admit your failures, list your goals, act on them and keep track of your accomplishments to avoid that.
If you have your internal critic under control, use it to your advantage. The critic should look at internal and external imperfections and identify what can be fixed and what cannot.
Most issues can’t be solved immediately. It can be tempting to skip this step, but persevere. Start small, be honest with yourself without being too harsh and act consistently, for the future is not determined.
We all contribute to the outcomes of life. Once we understand the outcomes, it becomes our responsibility to nudge them towards more stable and beneficial situations.
Peterson believes our contributions can have one of two effects, it can either tilt the world up towards Heaven, or down towards Hell.
Is a Canadian clinical psychologist, cultural critic, and professor of psychology. He has taught at Harvard and the University of Toronto and is an accomplished scientist on the psychology field.
Dr. Peterson is currently one of the world’s most popular public thinkers and writer of the bestseller 12 Rules for Life.
Peterson suggests human hierarchies aren’t socially created, but are effects of human evolution. His evidence for this is the fact that lobsters also have hierarchies.
Human and lobsters ancestors diverged millions of years before lobsters evolved, so their hierarchy developed independently of human societal structures. Another difference is that lobster hierarchy is mostly determined by biological factors like size and aggressiveness.
If you are planning to speak about something in front of an audience, you must know a lot about the topic - on average, 3 times as much as you're going to speak about it.
You need to have a real point (a problem you are trying to solve) and various narratives at hand that you can refer to in order to explain your point.