Accomplishment

[dust]

A.K.A. achievement, success, doing big things, etc

 

 

I watched an episode of The Big Bang Theory where the main characters are cleaning out the office of a university professor who recently died. They lament the idea that he seems to have been unsuccessful and died without having "accomplished" anything.

 

The kind of accomplishment they're talking about is, we assume, proving a scientific theory that has some kind of impact, discovering something, or somehow gaining some kind of renown for one's work. They want this. They feel like their lives won't have been "worth" anything if they don't "achieve" something.

 

So I have a few questions..

 

 

A) Is this belief -- that "accomplishment" is important -- as common as it seems to be in the USA?

B ) Is it common where you are / where you're from?

C) Do you set store by it? Do you want to have "accomplished" something before you die?

D) If so, what? What constitutes something important or grand enough that you'd say "Now I can die happy" ?

E) We set our own goals. If I set store by mine, and fail to accomplish them, haven't I set myself up for my own failure/unhappiness?

F) Is the idea of accomplishment/success not a major force behind war, poverty, and depression?

 

F) Does "accomplishment" have any place in Daoism or Buddhism? (philosophical)

G) Is there really such a thing as "accomplishment" ?

 

 

Hmm.. lots of questions..

 

I'm interested in the modern (American?) ideal of "accomplishments". It's my belief that it's hugely destructive, not just for individuals who fail to "succeed", but for everyone who's affected by everyone else's attempts, and often the results of successful accomplishment. I'm also not really sure what an accomplishment actually is these days.

 

I'm also interested in how it all fits in with Daoism and Zen. It's my belief that one can set and achieve goals and be quite happy doing it, but that one should be aware that placing any great importance on the idea of "accomplishment" is at best a great waste of energy. Knowing when enough is enough...?

 

...

 

edit: goddamn sunglasses emoticon

Edited November 23, 2014 by dustybeijing

[ChiDragon]

F) Does "accomplishment" have any place in Daoism or Buddhism? (philosophical)

 

If one can answer this question, then, it will be answered all of your questions.

 

A Taoist believe in the principle of Wu Wei(無為). Let Nature take its course; do not take action to interfere the course of Nature. Have no desire to glorify oneself.

 

Getting a certification of some kind or hold a title for one's prestige is a desire of glorification. This seems to be happening around the world. However, a true Taoist or Buddhist does not have such desire for accomplishment as part of their religious beliefs.

Edited November 23, 2014 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

Yeah, too many questions.

 

Have you ever helped someone without expectation of compensation? That is an accomplishment.

[thelerner]

Lets see.

 

Yes, yes, yes, publishing excellent book, yes, no, yes, yes.

 

There.

 

I think without some short term and long term goals we tend to fritter away out time. Tao is path, not just random wandering, at least not until one gains enough art to become artless.

[Marblehead]

... at least not until one gains enough art to become artless.

I like that.

[GrandmasterP]

To an extent there are drivers towards accomplishment' in the world of work.

There was a motto in my old job that went...

"Publish or perish."

The expectation was that every year active academics would have at least one learned paper published in a relevant journal.

There were funding implications for the university.

The fewer papers published the lower the grant income from central government.

The idea was to keep standards up and discourage laziness.

Having to accomplish something to meet a target can be a bind whereas accomplishing something for oneself is far more satisfying IMO.

That doesn't have to be a big thing either but the rewards of personal satisfaction far outweigh the relief felt from getting a job accomplished at work that one had to do 'or else!'.

Edited November 23, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[IntuitiveWanderer]

There is no such thing as success, because ultimately nothing matters. But it's fun to pretend like it does matter, and such.

 

In the future there will come an inevitable point when people realise that they have been carying too much cultural dead weight around, and they will start burning books and forgeting people. And start concentrating on the essence instead.

Edited November 23, 2014 by IntuitiveWanderer

[Aetherous]

 

E) We set our own goals. If I set store by mine, and fail to accomplish them, haven't I set myself up for my own failure/unhappiness?

 

Yes, but on the other hand, what's more important...to do something great in the world and help people, or to never have goals just for the sake of being happy? And perhaps this goal-less way of being represents a fear of failure, rather than actual contentment. Perhaps it's the opposite of all that is spiritual...

 

The way I see things, people these days strive far too hard to elicit good feelings from life (when really, they come and go)...and they strive far too little to do anything of value. At least personally, I know that doing something useful is more important than micromanaging my feelings while amounting to nothing...and for all that micromanaging, the feelings do what they will anyway.

 

But there is something to be said for not setting yourself up for disappointment, and for taking it easy on yourself.

 

...

 

This all kind of reminds me of Arjuna on the battlefield, in the Bhagavad Gita. It's just overthinking things, and not being true to your own nature. I think, to be true to your own nature, as human beings we want to play our part well. It's actually going against Nature to dull ourselves for the sake of feeling nothing.

Edited November 23, 2014 by Aetherous

[IntuitiveWanderer]

Yes, but on the other hand, what's more important...to do something great in the world and help people, or to never have goals just for the sake of being happy? And perhaps this goal-less way of being represents a fear of failure, rather than actual contentment. Perhaps it's the opposite of all that is spiritual...

 

The way I see things, people these days strive far too hard to elicit good feelings from life (when really, they come and go)...and they strive far too little to do anything of value. At least personally, I know that doing something useful is more important than micromanaging my feelings while amounting to nothing...and for all that micromanaging, the feelings do what they will anyway.

 

But there is something to be said for not setting yourself up for disappointment, and for taking it easy on yourself.

 

...

 

This all kind of reminds me of Arjuna on the battlefield, in the Bhagavad Gita. It's just overthinking things, and not being true to your own nature. I think, to be true to your own nature, as human beings we want to play our part well. It's actually going against Nature to dull ourselves for the sake of feeling nothing.

 

Indeed, executive functions go against the lower nature. We have not yet totally conquered the lower nature, this is why we are not yet living in a utopia.

 

Also. actually, Krishna tells Arjuna to get a grip on himself and slay his relatives and former friends in the name of righteousness.

 

I think that the Yogis, Sages, Brahmins have a far richer inner life than the average person who still is attached to the delusion that matter matters, precisely because they have subdued their lower nature and expanded their consciousness, thus perceiving the essence which is pure, beautiful, real, and undying.

 

And righteous conduct, selfless action, is a requirement in order to achieve liberation from the chains of Karma.

Edited November 23, 2014 by IntuitiveWanderer

[Marblehead]

There is no such thing as success, because ultimately nothing matters. But it's fun to pretend like it does matter, and such.

Okay. I agree.

 

In the future there will come an inevitable point when people realise that they have been carying too much cultural dead weight around, and they will start burning books and forgeting people. And start concentrating on the essence instead.

I highly doubt this though.

[IntuitiveWanderer]

Okay. I agree.

 

I highly doubt this though.

 

Yeah, maybe I slightly exagerated.

 

Also, I would like to add that what I mean by essence, is 'essential information' or 'quality information' as opposed to a pile of useless hopes, dreams and memories. I am thinking that, by that time in history, the global unity project will be complete and a centralized holistic cultural system will be established which will inevitably be tailored to the needs of different classes of people, for efficiency. And I am almost certain that 80 percent of the books published in the 21st century will be destroyed and forgotten.

Edited November 23, 2014 by IntuitiveWanderer

[Marblehead]

 

Also, I would like to add that ...

You are quite the optimist, aren't you?

[johndoe2012]

All ideas of accomplishment comes from a lack of true self worth.

 

When you finally get there and feel absolutely nothing is wrong with you and nothing is wrong with others genuine love stream from your chest and nothing else is needed.

 

This is how dropping down into your body feels like for me.

 

So basically you don't need to act to feel good. You feel good because you are.

[dust]

Yeah, too many questions

 

Sorry

 

 

I think without some short term and long term goals we tend to fritter away out time. Tao is path, not just random wandering, at least not until one gains enough art to become artless.

 

Indeed, without wanting something or attempting to achieve anything at all, one would sit around doing nothing until one starved to death. And most people don't want that. But I think it all depends on how big one dreams to achieve..?

 

If all I desire to accomplish in a day is eating an apple, and there's an apple on the tree outside, and I eat it, then I've had a good day. I've accomplished what I wanted. Seems simple. But if there had been no apples, I'd have been disappointed, and might've spent the whole day looking for an apple only to find that my neighbour had some really delicious oranges that he was happy to share.

 

So, firstly, why not just eat what's there? Why fight for apples? And secondly, why dream for anything much bigger than that? One can be quite happy eating apples and oranges, until one decides that it's a better accomplishment to eat elephants and sharks.

 

Most people in the world wouldn't consider eating an apple an "accomplishment" in the strict sense. To be considered a real accomplishment, it must be something impressive, like publishing a book or starring in a movie. But how do you know if the book is the apple or the orange?

 

 

 

Having to accomplish something to meet a target can be a bind whereas accomplishing something for oneself is far more satisfying IMO.

That doesn't have to be a big thing either but the rewards of personal satisfaction far outweigh the relief felt from getting a job accomplished at work that one had to do 'or else!'.

 

For sure. I do feel satisfaction on completing a beautiful painting, for example, but... it does depend on one's personal definition/idea of accomplishment. So many people wouldn't consider that an accomplishment.

 

People are so obsessed with accomplishing "great" things, with making "accomplishment" their accomplishment, that I feel they've missed the point entirely.

 

 

 

Yes, but on the other hand, what's more important...to do something great in the world and help people, or to never have goals just for the sake of being happy? And perhaps this goal-less way of being represents a fear of failure, rather than actual contentment. Perhaps it's the opposite of all that is spiritual...

 

Why should helping someone be considered an accomplishment?

 

If people forgot about trying to accomplish "great" things, there would be far less need to help people. In my opinion.

 

 

The way I see things, people these days strive far too hard to elicit good feelings from life (when really, they come and go)...and they strive far too little to do anything of value. At least personally, I know that doing something useful is more important than micromanaging my feelings while amounting to nothing...and for all that micromanaging, the feelings do what they will anyway.

 

What is something of "value" ? What is "amounting to nothing" ? Not accomplishing anything? Or not helping anyone?

 

What if I'm born on a far away island in a village with just a few hundred people, and spend my whole life fishing and swimming and bringing up my kids? I never affect a great change in the world... have I "amounted to nothing", or have I just lived a fairly contented life?

[dust]

So, just to be sure: as I haven't been told differently, I'm going ahead and believing that a majority of Americans are indeed obsessed with achievement, for better or worse.

 

I'm also seeing that many here on TTB believe, to an extent, that accomplishment is "worthy", and that if one doesn't achieve "great" accomplishments that help people, or do anything of "value" in life, one's life was a waste, worthless, a mistake...?

 

I find this at variance with the teachings of Tao, to be honest.

[ChiDragon]

I find this at variance with the teachings of Tao, to be honest.

 

It was not the variance with the teachings of Tao but those who had leaned differently from it.

Edited November 24, 2014 by ChiDragon

[dust]

Yeah that's pretty much what I meant to say

[Marblehead]

I'm also seeing that many here on TTB believe, to an extent, that accomplishment is "worthy", and that if one doesn't achieve "great" accomplishments that help people, or do anything of "value" in life, one's life was a waste, worthless, a mistake...?

 

I find this at variance with the teachings of Tao, to be honest.

I must disagree with you on this. If one is following the Way of Tao they will naturally be helpful to others. This is because a Taoist does what needs be done. Nothing more, nothing less. To save the life of a child. That is a great accomplishment even if that child was Hitler. But I won't speak about "great" because it is only natural.

 

And BTW, the Way of Tao is sometimes to destroy.

[dust]

I must disagree with you on this. If one is following the Way of Tao they will naturally be helpful to others. This is because a Taoist does what needs be done. Nothing more, nothing less. To save the life of a child. That is a great accomplishment even if that child was Hitler. But I won't speak about "great" because it is only natural.

 

And BTW, the Way of Tao is sometimes to destroy.

 

Little did you know, you didn't disagree with me...not entirely

 

I'm not saying that one should not be helpful. I'm not saying "Don't help people". I'm saying that there seems to be an opinion on here (edit: and everywhere else) that without going out of one's way to be helpful and compassionate, one is worthless. I think that's bizarre.

 

If, for example, I walk by the local river and see someone struggling, drowning, I will jump in to help. That's my human empathy/compassion/whatever taking over.

 

But to tell me that I should help, or that I shouldn't feel worth anything if I don't go out of my way to help people... Why?

 

Going out of one's way to "do good" can result in things like the Inquisition and the Iraq War. Charitable giving often (not always, but often) only addresses the symptoms rather than the true root cause of any problem. I'm not saying we shouldn't have charity, or donate to charity (again, instinct kicks in and I can't help but donate when I see starving or abused children on TV commercials), but I do wonder if it truly helps, in the end.

 

If I knew for a certainty that a man was coming to my house with the conscious design of doing me good, I should run for my life, as from that dry and parching wind of the African deserts called the simoom, which fills the mouth and nose and ears and eyes with dust till you are suffocated, for fear that I should get some of his good done to me — some of its virus mingled with my blood.

 

{...}

 

There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root, and it may be that he who bestows the largest amount of time and money on the needy is doing the most by his mode of life to produce that misery which he strives in vain to relieve.

 

-- Thoreau

 

 

Didn't Laozi tell us that the wise man treats the 10,000 things as straw dogs? And, as you say, Tao destroys too. Isn't impartiality the Way? Dao naturally helps us, and naturally hinders us too.

Edited November 24, 2014 by dustybeijing

[JinlianPai]

Its not about helping people its about helping yourself an opportunity that the tao made manifest in your life and if your spiritually intune with helping yourself then you help others.

 

There is no accomplishment without meaning.

 

Everyone has there reasons or meaning for how they are.

 

An accomplishment for one man is a accomplishment for all of mankind. So saying basically that somethings like this isnt wholly on man alone it is also on the tao who works thru that man to manifest something for mankind and by doing so gives the honor of accomplish to that man.

 

Helping others.......

[Marblehead]

But to tell me that I should help, or that I shouldn't feel worth anything if I don't go out of my way to help people... Why?

You done good. That "should" word is key here in your response.

 

And BTW, if it were a grown up Hitler and I knew what he was I wouldn't lift a finger for him. In fact, I would likely help do him in.

 

 

Didn't Laozi tell us that the wise man treats the 10,000 things as straw dogs? And, as you say, Tao destroys too. Isn't impartiality the Way? Dao naturally helps us, and naturally hinders us too.

Yes, Impartiality. It's almost saddening to look at it this way but that is reality.

[dust]

Yeah almost, but I think that it's impossible for any normal human to be entirely impartial. Dao, Buddhism, Hinduism.. the philosophical aspect of these does not teach that to be "enlightened" is to lose one's humanity.

 

A living person cannot be entirely as impartial as Dao itself, because then one would cease to be a person.

 

But to be obsessed with giving, helping, charity.. to make accomplishing charitable things, usually for the sake of fulfilling one's own selfish need to be giving, helpful, etc.. it's not actually helpful. That's what I get from Laozi. Non-interference. Less action based on morals and social convention, and more living based on doing what feels natural. Sometimes that might be murder.. most of the time it won't.

[Marblehead]

No argument from me to that last post.

 

Yes, I have my biases and preferences. I have never denied that.

 

And yes, I give to those organizations I chose to give to and have no money left for others.

 

And while I agree that the help I offer is only a temporary crutch, better than no crutch at all. Maybe it will be just that little bit that helped someone get back on their feet again.

 

No, I cannot be as selfless as is Tao. Or even as Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu suggest. But I do what I can without causing myself internal conflict.

 

I won't speak to your last sentence. I am a military man, you know.

[dust]

I do. And I agree with your mantra.