What do you think?
Rate this book
The Pragmatist's Guide #1
The Pragmatist’s Guide to Life: A Guide to Creating Your Own Answers to Life’s Biggest Questions
As humans, we get to choose what we believe and who we want to be. This book is a ruthlessly pragmatic guide to creating your own answers to life's biggest questions.
Each of this book's four chapters covers one of the most important questions a person must ask themselves:
Rather than give you answers to these questions, this guide provides a framework that helps you develop your own answers while equipping you with the neuroscientific tools necessary to transform yourself into whomever you choose to be.
If you are looking for a light read that will make you feel good about yourself, this isn’t the book for you. If you want to take the time to think hard, take full ownership of the person you have allowed yourself to become, and permanently transform yourself into the best iteration of that person then you have found your book.
The book was created as the work of a non-profit institution (http://pragmatist.guide/) dedicated to helping people think through the big questions in life without leading them to a specific answer, all proceeds from the sale of the book go to the nonprofit and not the author.
311 pages, Kindle Edition
Published February 4, 2018
377 people are currently reading
609 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
January 29, 2019
The pragmatic way I read this book was to tolerate most of it, appreciate a few portions of it and roll my eyes at the rest. I was willing to see what this couple had to say about life and how they believe it can be improved, and there were even a few points I agreed with them on. But, sadly, that is the nature of a book like this. Any book that begins by telling you that you can be whatever you want to be and that you should learn to break away from harmful societal ideologies and then proceeds to command you to listen to the author and do exactly as they say (no cheating kids!)during a series of increasingly more pathetic thought experiments seems like a melting pot of hypocrisy that I find it hard to take seriously.
I was almost okay with this book, until I got to the section near the end, where they suggest that you create a public persona and expect a good way for you to do this is to go to tvtropes and choose one for yourself, and then add to the ridiculousness of this idea by telling the reader that they should also carefully consider adding an annoying flaw to their made up personality so that they are memorable for only that one character flaw. Apparently, that's how we can become the next president.
I was particularly fond of the portion of this book where they claimed that the American public only thought that Bill Clinton's infidelity was offensive because he chose to have sex with an ugly woman. Not that he was wrong and that he was a jerk for cheating on his wife, but that he was only wrong for not choosing a foxier playmate. Wow. Just wow. You know, three stars might have been a bit generous for this review, actually.
In any case, there were some parts that I agreed with. I liked the part where there were no more words and the book was over. I really am sorry, but I cannot take this seriously.
Also, I am now Batman. And I fart. In public. Remember me.
I was almost okay with this book, until I got to the section near the end, where they suggest that you create a public persona and expect a good way for you to do this is to go to tvtropes and choose one for yourself, and then add to the ridiculousness of this idea by telling the reader that they should also carefully consider adding an annoying flaw to their made up personality so that they are memorable for only that one character flaw. Apparently, that's how we can become the next president.
I was particularly fond of the portion of this book where they claimed that the American public only thought that Bill Clinton's infidelity was offensive because he chose to have sex with an ugly woman. Not that he was wrong and that he was a jerk for cheating on his wife, but that he was only wrong for not choosing a foxier playmate. Wow. Just wow. You know, three stars might have been a bit generous for this review, actually.
In any case, there were some parts that I agreed with. I liked the part where there were no more words and the book was over. I really am sorry, but I cannot take this seriously.
Also, I am now Batman. And I fart. In public. Remember me.
March 27, 2021
I'm too old to waste time finishing bad books.
On the surface, this book holds promise. The overall idea--figure out what you believe and then live your life according to those baseline beliefs--makes sense. But beyond that one sentence, things go downhill. The authors are self-congratulatory to a fault and extremely anti-intellectual. Actual philosophy and such--you know, the entirety of human thought for millennia--is "stuffy" and impractical. But these two entrepreneurs have all the answers if you'll just follow their agenda.
The thought exercises offered in the first half of the book (which is as far as I read) are often sophomoric and more often intellectually dishonest, setting up false dichotomies designed to funnel the reader into accepting the authors' authority rather than to stimulate actual critical thinking. They create unsolvable dilemmas and then, when the reader gets tangled, they offer seemingly clear solutions--to problems that they created. Oh, and if you turn to philosophy to solve these dilemmas, you're imprisoned by ideology and not living your true values.
Also, be warned that this "guide to life" is completely amoral. If you decide that your baseline values are to promote your own benefit at the expense of others or that you really derive pleasure from, say, torturing small animals, the premise of this book is that you should order your life to maximize those values. It's moral relativism in the extreme crossed with a particularly virulent form of modern solipsism and white American entitlement.
Finally, the account written by Simone of how she was perfectly happy in her life until she met Michael and he showed her that her life was shallow and meaningless and now she lives according to his rules and she's *so much happier* is one giant neon red flag. Maybe Michael is a fantastic guy. But the way Simone describes her "conversion" reads like a memoir of an abusive marriage or becoming a cult member. It's creepy and sad and at least as big a turn-off as the intellectual laziness, amorality, and dishonesty in their "philosophy." In fact, if you'd like to know what trying to reason with a narcissistic sociopath is like, just read this book. Better yet, skip the gaslighting and condescension and read some real philosophy.
On the surface, this book holds promise. The overall idea--figure out what you believe and then live your life according to those baseline beliefs--makes sense. But beyond that one sentence, things go downhill. The authors are self-congratulatory to a fault and extremely anti-intellectual. Actual philosophy and such--you know, the entirety of human thought for millennia--is "stuffy" and impractical. But these two entrepreneurs have all the answers if you'll just follow their agenda.
The thought exercises offered in the first half of the book (which is as far as I read) are often sophomoric and more often intellectually dishonest, setting up false dichotomies designed to funnel the reader into accepting the authors' authority rather than to stimulate actual critical thinking. They create unsolvable dilemmas and then, when the reader gets tangled, they offer seemingly clear solutions--to problems that they created. Oh, and if you turn to philosophy to solve these dilemmas, you're imprisoned by ideology and not living your true values.
Also, be warned that this "guide to life" is completely amoral. If you decide that your baseline values are to promote your own benefit at the expense of others or that you really derive pleasure from, say, torturing small animals, the premise of this book is that you should order your life to maximize those values. It's moral relativism in the extreme crossed with a particularly virulent form of modern solipsism and white American entitlement.
Finally, the account written by Simone of how she was perfectly happy in her life until she met Michael and he showed her that her life was shallow and meaningless and now she lives according to his rules and she's *so much happier* is one giant neon red flag. Maybe Michael is a fantastic guy. But the way Simone describes her "conversion" reads like a memoir of an abusive marriage or becoming a cult member. It's creepy and sad and at least as big a turn-off as the intellectual laziness, amorality, and dishonesty in their "philosophy." In fact, if you'd like to know what trying to reason with a narcissistic sociopath is like, just read this book. Better yet, skip the gaslighting and condescension and read some real philosophy.
April 1, 2018
Whether you are interested in general “life guide" books, psychology, or are simply wanting a good and stimulating read, this book is definitely worth a shot! It is clearly written and done so in a unique way, drawing from classic and modern influences suitable for any readership. It offers a new and fresh perspective on a subject which is well-documented and is written in an engaging and informative way which will leave readers feeling they have accomplished something after finishing and are able to reflect on the points contained within. Overall, very worthwhile read!
April 18, 2018
If I had to describe this book I would call it the crossfit of the self help genre. It is the type of book that would roll its eyes dramatically at the concept of “learning to love yourself” instead demanding that you learn to be someone worthy of love or learn to stop expecting the world to love you. If that type of pragmatic view of the world jives with you, you are going to go nuts for this book.
August 8, 2018
Couldn't even make it through the first chapter. Her description of their first date set of every red flag in my head. He sounds exactly like my abusive ex.
April 30, 2021
Having a clear goal/purpose/vision is crucial in Life. We usually get carried on by day to day affairs. Adversaries sometimes knock us down. Having clear cut vision which we can refer back as our guide is the important skill. This book is at it - The intentional living.
Goal/Purpose/Vision - These are referred together as objective function. The idea is that our decisions can be better made to maximise our objective function. The objective function can be "Spread happiness as much as possible", for example. But, We have to get better clarity at it.
For example, If our goal is to reduce the current weight, It helps immensely when we make it more concrete. Why do we want to reduce the weight? Is it for its own sake? Is it to show off our self control? Is it to become beautiful? Is it to become healthier? Is it to compare with a slim friend? Without knowing the clarified reason which we deeply believe as personal truth, We are prone to derail. If our ultimate objective is to be healthier, What is the point in comparing with a slim person and get demotivated?
So, This is how the objective function of our life too works - giving better clarity and guidance at crucial decisions. This is what the book talks and there are lots of thought experiments to get better clarity while choosing the objective function.
Our Ideologies are the models that we believe them to work to maximise our objective function. By making this distinction, It is possible to not to be driven by our ideology. If our objective is to maximise the social welfare, Communism may be an ideology to do that. But If the evidences convince us that there are better models, Then this way of thinking allows us to shift our ideology rather than blindly sticking to it. And The book discusses on how we can decide ideology and get the evidences to make it better.
The self image and the social image are the two important tools to make our goals/visions possible. In the discussion of self image, There is a closer but different model, like in cognitive behaviour therapy. How we perceive ourselves is also very important in how we react to the circumstances. If one perceives himself as a saint, He may not get angry unnecessarily which may go against his perceived self. We have to align our self image with the objective function.
There are lots of information on how to change the habits for better, How to better regulate emotions and so on, based on this model. The final chapter talks about the social image. One may wonder why we have to have different social image? Won't it be better to have social image that reflects the self? The book shows the clear distinction here. I love the analogy of software. The coding is like the self image But One cannot post the coding on the software package, rather We post the important features that others can understand. This understandable version is the social image. The book discusses it deeper in the final chapter.
Overall This is not the bed time self-help book. It needs open mindedness and It is the very thoughtful book. I recommend this as a guide, to get some idea on how to think about the big questions of Life!
Goal/Purpose/Vision - These are referred together as objective function. The idea is that our decisions can be better made to maximise our objective function. The objective function can be "Spread happiness as much as possible", for example. But, We have to get better clarity at it.
For example, If our goal is to reduce the current weight, It helps immensely when we make it more concrete. Why do we want to reduce the weight? Is it for its own sake? Is it to show off our self control? Is it to become beautiful? Is it to become healthier? Is it to compare with a slim friend? Without knowing the clarified reason which we deeply believe as personal truth, We are prone to derail. If our ultimate objective is to be healthier, What is the point in comparing with a slim person and get demotivated?
So, This is how the objective function of our life too works - giving better clarity and guidance at crucial decisions. This is what the book talks and there are lots of thought experiments to get better clarity while choosing the objective function.
Our Ideologies are the models that we believe them to work to maximise our objective function. By making this distinction, It is possible to not to be driven by our ideology. If our objective is to maximise the social welfare, Communism may be an ideology to do that. But If the evidences convince us that there are better models, Then this way of thinking allows us to shift our ideology rather than blindly sticking to it. And The book discusses on how we can decide ideology and get the evidences to make it better.
The self image and the social image are the two important tools to make our goals/visions possible. In the discussion of self image, There is a closer but different model, like in cognitive behaviour therapy. How we perceive ourselves is also very important in how we react to the circumstances. If one perceives himself as a saint, He may not get angry unnecessarily which may go against his perceived self. We have to align our self image with the objective function.
There are lots of information on how to change the habits for better, How to better regulate emotions and so on, based on this model. The final chapter talks about the social image. One may wonder why we have to have different social image? Won't it be better to have social image that reflects the self? The book shows the clear distinction here. I love the analogy of software. The coding is like the self image But One cannot post the coding on the software package, rather We post the important features that others can understand. This understandable version is the social image. The book discusses it deeper in the final chapter.
Overall This is not the bed time self-help book. It needs open mindedness and It is the very thoughtful book. I recommend this as a guide, to get some idea on how to think about the big questions of Life!
August 11, 2018
One of the most impactful books I have ever read. It is the closest thing I have to a personal bible. It is just so darn good at getting you to look at things from a new perspective without telling you what to think.
February 27, 2018
kindle unlimited, We all always have choices. It is merely a question of whether we make a choice one way, the other way, now many choices there are, and if some decide to not make a decision at all. Pretty much the entire book is all hypothesis with few choices and even fewer proofs. A life, a being of any type, is a whole jigsaw puzzle, so without the entire, completed puzzle is part of the whole which cannot be without the separate pieces, and just perhaps the corner peices or the outline pieces are more important but just in the way that they are the framework, the guideline for the rest, the entire thing. Mentioning the Tree then acting as if all parts are always the same quality or 'weighted' is, again, akin to looking at just the leaves but not the trunk nor the roots, and is therefore illogical, undoable, and therefore of not much real worth. It is 'logical inconsistencies' to believe in a loving god who could wipe out a whole planet over what amounted to a badly misbehaving child being killed versus disciplined. It is more likely to happen when it's something from someone's deeper beliefs or training, but it is not equal to 'conspiracy theory'. Parents/Spouse deaths are not 'mitigated' they are dealt with or there are psychological issues to follow.
No, 'we' do not prefer to being told what to believe to defend what what we wish were true; some of the 'we' were not born, formed, nor made that way. There is spirtuality versus religion, and too many other areas which I disagree with or totally repute. Something such as animal sentiency or feelings, and what level those are, would not only be depended upon what type animal but what genetics have brought forth and even strengthened. Purpose is not a 'thing' or even way of life, it is the whole life and actions, reactions, and cause and effect of all that. How is intrinsic value determined by, as the writers claim, when they have already started in on that people are basically biased in their thoughts and actions, and perhaps not intentionally but still go on to see things within the framework they know, no matter how 'enlightened' they are. Beliving or not believing a cows life, itd experiences, presuppose sub-human treatreatment/abuse, where there are have been and are more and more free range and other more 'humane' practices for birthing, raising, and living.
The next part sounds more akin to a paper on adrenaline junkies versus out of shaped and/or unlimited time, but without some 'purpose' there is...no purpose, so what is the purpose of even being, so in effect cancels out part of the other things being claimed. To presuppose that all people equate a supposedly simple term as, for example, Athiest, is also ridiculous, because those of the Agnostic category have had that changed, redefined, and totally turned around by some and now doesn't even get the same dictionary listing much less agreement by different people/religions in general. A test, expecially psycholgical and like ones, are only as good and/or helpful as the people that made the tests, as well as the mindset and personality of the person taking the test. There are different types of 'intelligence', including mental, emotional and others, so again cannot equate apples and oranges beyond that they are fruits. Repeatedly stating that everyone's objective function and then {directly opposite} of what the book proposed to do {supposedly help someone pick their objective funtion, within even the framework of the book, which keeps telling them tat they will be wrong, regardless it seems. Who gets to rule that a person's or other species has 'intrinsic value', becuase assuredly many would disagree, and for various reasons.
Also no, changing the way a question is considered 'cheating' BUT NOT if one is a thinking breathing living human being with their own mind, of any decent mentality, that is considering the question/s but at the same time is also thinking in and out of context; 1 + 1 = 2....unless basic math is not used but something such as algebra or other such maths that change the meaning in some ways. There are too many types of people, too many types of religions, too many types of personalities, of mindsets, of beliefs which have subsets. What {all} I belive, and do which is not necessarily the same thing, is to deny that any such supposedly complex 'thing' is so black and white, with no grays or exeptions or addendums or even tweeks. Just as stating that not accepting or accepting no negative feelings completely ignores the psychological findings that show without one how is someone to feel or even recognize what is is and what it is for. There is no light without dark, no good without bad, so one cannot attempt what is basically an economist's 'vacuum' versus free or closed market...it's all based on supposition of just one fact affecting everything else, even when that is obviously not the true world. How is 'mental-scapes' not the same or in the same section as ideas?
No, someone's guessed mental states, even for something such as being alone in a movie house, noticing it, etcetera, presupposes that the person is not a loner, did not intend and/or want to be there alone, and/or affected in any way, if they even noticed it at all, and wrong suppositions such as that are throughout the book, always going for one thing, few possible reactions, and not considering any other things or ways at all, so yes basically pseudo science, heavy on psuedo. It is a total mishmash of several self help type books, one that claims to not use overly scientific words/explanations, as a way to basically ignore the scientific facts already in evidence, then oxymoronically adding in mental states for a very long section, yet in other parts claiming that can or should be over-rode or in direct opposition learn to change them all, with pseudo science babble. There are huge parts that don't seem to have any use, beyond being 'filler' for an already overly long medically oriented rambling mess. As for more 'normal' vocaulary being used in this book, I have been consistently tested with one of the highest vocabularies mixed with other needed factors including retention and word pre- and suffixes, and I had to keep stopping to look up terms. Was very intensely BORED & migraine-d.
As humans, we get to choose what we believe and who we want to be. This book is a ruthlessly pragmatic guide to creating your own answers to life's biggest questions.
Each of this book's four chapters covers one of the most important questions a person must ask themselves:
What is the purpose of my life?
How can I best realize the purpose of my life?
Who do I want to be?
How do I want other people to think of me?
Rather than give you answers to these questions, this guide provides a framework that helps you develop your own answers while equipping you with the neuroscientific tools necessary to transform yourself into whomever you choose to be.
If you are looking for a light read that will make you feel good about yourself, this isn’t the book for you. If you want to take the time to think hard, take full ownership of the person you have allowed yourself to become, and permanently transform yourself into the best iteration of that person then you have found your book.
The book was created as the work of a non-profit institution (http://pragmatist.guide/) dedicated to helping people think through the big questions in life without leading them to a specific answer, all proceeds from the sale of the book go to the nonprofit and not the author.
No, 'we' do not prefer to being told what to believe to defend what what we wish were true; some of the 'we' were not born, formed, nor made that way. There is spirtuality versus religion, and too many other areas which I disagree with or totally repute. Something such as animal sentiency or feelings, and what level those are, would not only be depended upon what type animal but what genetics have brought forth and even strengthened. Purpose is not a 'thing' or even way of life, it is the whole life and actions, reactions, and cause and effect of all that. How is intrinsic value determined by, as the writers claim, when they have already started in on that people are basically biased in their thoughts and actions, and perhaps not intentionally but still go on to see things within the framework they know, no matter how 'enlightened' they are. Beliving or not believing a cows life, itd experiences, presuppose sub-human treatreatment/abuse, where there are have been and are more and more free range and other more 'humane' practices for birthing, raising, and living.
The next part sounds more akin to a paper on adrenaline junkies versus out of shaped and/or unlimited time, but without some 'purpose' there is...no purpose, so what is the purpose of even being, so in effect cancels out part of the other things being claimed. To presuppose that all people equate a supposedly simple term as, for example, Athiest, is also ridiculous, because those of the Agnostic category have had that changed, redefined, and totally turned around by some and now doesn't even get the same dictionary listing much less agreement by different people/religions in general. A test, expecially psycholgical and like ones, are only as good and/or helpful as the people that made the tests, as well as the mindset and personality of the person taking the test. There are different types of 'intelligence', including mental, emotional and others, so again cannot equate apples and oranges beyond that they are fruits. Repeatedly stating that everyone's objective function and then {directly opposite} of what the book proposed to do {supposedly help someone pick their objective funtion, within even the framework of the book, which keeps telling them tat they will be wrong, regardless it seems. Who gets to rule that a person's or other species has 'intrinsic value', becuase assuredly many would disagree, and for various reasons.
Also no, changing the way a question is considered 'cheating' BUT NOT if one is a thinking breathing living human being with their own mind, of any decent mentality, that is considering the question/s but at the same time is also thinking in and out of context; 1 + 1 = 2....unless basic math is not used but something such as algebra or other such maths that change the meaning in some ways. There are too many types of people, too many types of religions, too many types of personalities, of mindsets, of beliefs which have subsets. What {all} I belive, and do which is not necessarily the same thing, is to deny that any such supposedly complex 'thing' is so black and white, with no grays or exeptions or addendums or even tweeks. Just as stating that not accepting or accepting no negative feelings completely ignores the psychological findings that show without one how is someone to feel or even recognize what is is and what it is for. There is no light without dark, no good without bad, so one cannot attempt what is basically an economist's 'vacuum' versus free or closed market...it's all based on supposition of just one fact affecting everything else, even when that is obviously not the true world. How is 'mental-scapes' not the same or in the same section as ideas?
No, someone's guessed mental states, even for something such as being alone in a movie house, noticing it, etcetera, presupposes that the person is not a loner, did not intend and/or want to be there alone, and/or affected in any way, if they even noticed it at all, and wrong suppositions such as that are throughout the book, always going for one thing, few possible reactions, and not considering any other things or ways at all, so yes basically pseudo science, heavy on psuedo. It is a total mishmash of several self help type books, one that claims to not use overly scientific words/explanations, as a way to basically ignore the scientific facts already in evidence, then oxymoronically adding in mental states for a very long section, yet in other parts claiming that can or should be over-rode or in direct opposition learn to change them all, with pseudo science babble. There are huge parts that don't seem to have any use, beyond being 'filler' for an already overly long medically oriented rambling mess. As for more 'normal' vocaulary being used in this book, I have been consistently tested with one of the highest vocabularies mixed with other needed factors including retention and word pre- and suffixes, and I had to keep stopping to look up terms. Was very intensely BORED & migraine-d.
As humans, we get to choose what we believe and who we want to be. This book is a ruthlessly pragmatic guide to creating your own answers to life's biggest questions.
Each of this book's four chapters covers one of the most important questions a person must ask themselves:
What is the purpose of my life?
How can I best realize the purpose of my life?
Who do I want to be?
How do I want other people to think of me?
Rather than give you answers to these questions, this guide provides a framework that helps you develop your own answers while equipping you with the neuroscientific tools necessary to transform yourself into whomever you choose to be.
If you are looking for a light read that will make you feel good about yourself, this isn’t the book for you. If you want to take the time to think hard, take full ownership of the person you have allowed yourself to become, and permanently transform yourself into the best iteration of that person then you have found your book.
The book was created as the work of a non-profit institution (http://pragmatist.guide/) dedicated to helping people think through the big questions in life without leading them to a specific answer, all proceeds from the sale of the book go to the nonprofit and not the author.
January 16, 2021
Overly simplistic, confused.
October 18, 2023
What?
This book seems full of pseudoscience and stuff that hasn't been agreed upon in the scientific
community. I'm no scientist, so maybe this is correct and I'm totally in the wrong. I did take an AP Psych class last year, and very few things in this book lined up with what was taught in that class. But again, I could be wrong.
Also, authors? Please, please for the love of the world, edit the "Cultural Representation & Extinction" chapter. Have a few people edit it, please. The rest of the book was fine grammar-wise, but I almost had a stroke reading this chapter. It's missing a lot of commas and had many run-on sentences. (But there was a "where" where there should have been a "were," so maybe this chapter wasn't edited well or at all?) I don't know science, but I do know English.
Another thing on the language: the authors promised that they wouldn't use words that were hard to understand, but they did so anyway. I had to put down the book to Google a word every few sentences.
Maybe these authors are super, super smart and their thinking is obviously much higher than ours. That's totally plausible. It's also possible that I'm way more stupid than the rest of the population, so that's why I didn't like this book. Maybe the assignment of this book tainted my opinion of it before I even read it (though I don't think that's true. I wouldn't read this kind of book of my own accord).
I do think it was cool that a couple wrote this book together. I don't think many couples could do that, so kudos!
This book seems full of pseudoscience and stuff that hasn't been agreed upon in the scientific
community. I'm no scientist, so maybe this is correct and I'm totally in the wrong. I did take an AP Psych class last year, and very few things in this book lined up with what was taught in that class. But again, I could be wrong.
Also, authors? Please, please for the love of the world, edit the "Cultural Representation & Extinction" chapter. Have a few people edit it, please. The rest of the book was fine grammar-wise, but I almost had a stroke reading this chapter. It's missing a lot of commas and had many run-on sentences. (But there was a "where" where there should have been a "were," so maybe this chapter wasn't edited well or at all?) I don't know science, but I do know English.
Another thing on the language: the authors promised that they wouldn't use words that were hard to understand, but they did so anyway. I had to put down the book to Google a word every few sentences.
Maybe these authors are super, super smart and their thinking is obviously much higher than ours. That's totally plausible. It's also possible that I'm way more stupid than the rest of the population, so that's why I didn't like this book. Maybe the assignment of this book tainted my opinion of it before I even read it (though I don't think that's true. I wouldn't read this kind of book of my own accord).
I do think it was cool that a couple wrote this book together. I don't think many couples could do that, so kudos!
December 1, 2023
At the heart of this book is the concept that we ought to be intentional about our values. The authors suggest that we first clarify what matters most to us, and then shape our lives accordingly.
They refer to this as the 'objective function', a term they use to describe a goal we aim to maximise, such as enhancing human well-being or personal enjoyment.
Once our core values are in place, we can align our beliefs and ideologies with them. For example, one might adopt communism as a means to promote collective well-being.
The book culminates in what could be termed a psychological toolkit, offering strategies for shaping ourselves into individuals who can fulfil our objective function and adhere to our chosen ideologies.
While I agree that living intentionally is crucial, rather than drifting through life without direction, I find the method outlined in 'The Pragmatist's Guide to Life' somewhat impersonal. The suggestion that we can measure what we value with mathematical accuracy seems unrealistic; values are inherently subjective.
I found the latter part of the book most beneficial. Despite its tendency towards generic self-help advice, it presents a solid compilation of guidance for personal development.
They refer to this as the 'objective function', a term they use to describe a goal we aim to maximise, such as enhancing human well-being or personal enjoyment.
Once our core values are in place, we can align our beliefs and ideologies with them. For example, one might adopt communism as a means to promote collective well-being.
The book culminates in what could be termed a psychological toolkit, offering strategies for shaping ourselves into individuals who can fulfil our objective function and adhere to our chosen ideologies.
While I agree that living intentionally is crucial, rather than drifting through life without direction, I find the method outlined in 'The Pragmatist's Guide to Life' somewhat impersonal. The suggestion that we can measure what we value with mathematical accuracy seems unrealistic; values are inherently subjective.
I found the latter part of the book most beneficial. Despite its tendency towards generic self-help advice, it presents a solid compilation of guidance for personal development.
June 20, 2024
Thought provoking and worth reading
I enjoyed this book and appreciate that the authors have studied and thought through their ideas many of which are thought provoking and bring a somewhat different perspective to issues and concepts that are somewhat similar.
I did not fully agree with all that is proposed and yet was in no way ready to completely dismiss their views and opinions.
One issue that I found difficult to embrace was the idea of intentionally creating weaknesses in one's public persona. Personally I believe we all have enough of those and only have to self evaluative and humble enough to admit them.
Another confusing term is "secular Calvinism." Given that John Calvin developed and clearly wrote about his way of Christian faith, I am challenged to think how his principles or institutes could be considered secular. The authors don't really explain what they mean by their adopted term for that worldview. Whatever it is I would suggest it is not Calvinism.
I enjoyed the book and will likely go over my highlighted sections again
I enjoyed this book and appreciate that the authors have studied and thought through their ideas many of which are thought provoking and bring a somewhat different perspective to issues and concepts that are somewhat similar.
I did not fully agree with all that is proposed and yet was in no way ready to completely dismiss their views and opinions.
One issue that I found difficult to embrace was the idea of intentionally creating weaknesses in one's public persona. Personally I believe we all have enough of those and only have to self evaluative and humble enough to admit them.
Another confusing term is "secular Calvinism." Given that John Calvin developed and clearly wrote about his way of Christian faith, I am challenged to think how his principles or institutes could be considered secular. The authors don't really explain what they mean by their adopted term for that worldview. Whatever it is I would suggest it is not Calvinism.
I enjoyed the book and will likely go over my highlighted sections again
April 9, 2024
Overall a rather excellent book. I enjoyed the thought experiments provided as a way to test how much you really value an objective function. Furthermore I also found the information about mental models very useful for dealing with alot of life's problems. The book is let down by a few spelling/grammar errors and it can be a bit boring without many examples showing when objective functions were being pursued either in real life or in fiction. But overall, it was still a very useful book for improving your life and I would recommend it.
November 8, 2024
The handbook for getting your life pointed in the right direction
This text walks a thin line: highlighting how you might define a more intentional, effective version of yourself that is inline with your stated values, while simultaneously being free of opinions as to what that self ought to be (with one token exception).
I will refer back to this often as I iterate on my regular reflection periods and check for sustained consistency between stated values, manifest behaviors, and self image analysis.
Easily recommended for those that are tired of self-help not working
This text walks a thin line: highlighting how you might define a more intentional, effective version of yourself that is inline with your stated values, while simultaneously being free of opinions as to what that self ought to be (with one token exception).
I will refer back to this often as I iterate on my regular reflection periods and check for sustained consistency between stated values, manifest behaviors, and self image analysis.
Easily recommended for those that are tired of self-help not working
May 13, 2022
Every page was a learning experience!
I took my time, had to, checking words definitions nearly every page. Rereading pages, paragraphs or sentences nearly as often. Learning, questioning and laughing (those questions such as setting off a bomb, made me gasp in shock, but boy did I think, think again and rethink my answers) driving me to new thoughts. Challenging everything I thought I knew, but I've purchased the next two books, so yes, intriguing for sure.
I took my time, had to, checking words definitions nearly every page. Rereading pages, paragraphs or sentences nearly as often. Learning, questioning and laughing (those questions such as setting off a bomb, made me gasp in shock, but boy did I think, think again and rethink my answers) driving me to new thoughts. Challenging everything I thought I knew, but I've purchased the next two books, so yes, intriguing for sure.
July 7, 2025
While not all of Malcolms points are good. They are interesting to think about.
I do like his section on how to present yourself. It seems to make sense intuitively.
He does have an atypical mind. Most people do not have a singular reason they dedicate their life to ruthlessly.
The belief tree is also an interesting concept
I do like his section on how to present yourself. It seems to make sense intuitively.
He does have an atypical mind. Most people do not have a singular reason they dedicate their life to ruthlessly.
The belief tree is also an interesting concept
January 20, 2024
Meh. Pretty obvious to everybody with sufficient levels of agency.
July 21, 2024
Very thoughtful and compelling arguments for crafting a new practical approach to a“real” and exciting life. Simple but deep. Now I need time to process and start the action!
November 9, 2021
Trying out this framework now to see if I can get it working for me. It's much more logical/rational and all-encompassing than anything else I've come across of this type. It's also not prescriptive, which I think is key. A bit to early yet to say if this will move me in direction I want to go, but promising nonetheless and 5-stars for introducing such a clear view on a methodological way to basically "design" your life.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews