Joshe

I use Claude Code almost everyday. It rarely struggles with anything I give it, and when it does, I can see the gaps and steer it right back on track. The other day, I built an app to manage a very specific, very tedious work project in about 5 hours. It was insane how efficient and accurate this app allowed me to execute the project. If you know what you’re doing, you can create some very real, very helpful stuff.

We can't summon engagement consistently. No matter how much we try, we can't overpower our nature, and we'll eventually burn out if we try. Willpower and determination require an energetic force, which come and go as byproducts of thought and chemistry, therefore is unreliable. The most engaged I've ever been was when I had no backup plan. One path with no exits. If you want that level of engagement without a life crisis forcing it, you have to create it yourself by cutting all escape routes. This forum is an example of one of many escape routes. A common misconception is that people arrive at their destination by taking massive action, 100% commitment, and unwavering dedication to their goals. But this is very rarely the case. Reaching the destination usually happens naturally when there's nothing else competing for your attention. Do or die situations provide this, as well as hitting rock bottom and accepting an olive branch, or simply by being able to afford putting the majority of your time into the thing, which most people cannot afford. If your survival isn't really on the line or if you have too many other obligations, then you're going to have to somehow subtract all escape routes to make the main thing the main thing. Easier said than done.

Lol

I find term "life trajectory" more fitting than "life purpose". The idea of a single life purpose can make one blind to alternative, potentially more aligned paths. To double down on a single purpose seems a mistake to me. A big insight for me was realizing purpose doesn't survive as a feeling. If purpose is built on felt meaning, it will eventually collapse, at least for me. I had an interesting discussion with AI about this a while back, and found following interesting. --- Phase 1: Purpose chosen from feeling (the common failure) The insight moment Evan has a strong experience—maybe a book, a conversation, a realization during a quiet night. His internal state: “Holy shit. This explains everything.” “This feels true.” “This is what I’m supposed to do.” Let’s say the insight is: “My purpose is to help people see truth.” At this moment: His mind feels integrated Anxiety drops The future feels coherent Identity snaps into place This is felt bigness. The decision he makes Evan thinks: “Since this feels this clear, it must be my life purpose.” So he declares it: To himself Maybe to others He reorganizes his self-image around it Crucially, the purpose is stored as: A story A self-concept A motivational idea It lives in his feelings and narrative, not his structure. Phase 2: Normalization (where confusion starts) Months pass. Then a year. The insight hasn’t become false. But it has become: Familiar Obvious Emotionally quiet Internally, Evan now notices: “I don’t feel driven by this anymore.” “If this were really my purpose, wouldn’t it still feel powerful?” “Maybe I was just high on insight.” Here’s the key mistake his mind almost always makes: He interprets loss of feeling as loss of validity. So now: He questions the purpose He reopens the option space He starts browsing alternatives again At this stage, he’s vulnerable to: New “big” insights New identities New purposes This is the purpose churn loop. Phase 3: The correction (where maturity enters) Eventually—either through reflection or pain—Evan notices a pattern: “Every purpose I choose feels huge at first… then normal.” “But some paths feel wrong even when I’m uninspired.” This is the turning point. He stops asking: “What feels meaningful?” And starts asking: “What breaks me when I violate it?” Phase 4: Purpose rebuilt as a constraint Evan revisits the same domain—truth, clarity, systems, whatever—but now watches his actual behavior. He notices something specific: When he avoids shallow work, he’s fine When he avoids people-pleasing, he’s fine When he avoids performative bullshit, he’s fine But: When he lies to himself → anxiety spikes When he works on empty status goals → energy collapses When he suppresses his need to understand → resentment builds These reactions happen without motivation. So he reframes his purpose like this: Not: “My purpose is to help people see truth.” But: “I cannot live a life that requires me to lie to myself or operate in bad faith.” This is no longer inspirational. It is exclusionary. Phase 5: How this changes daily decisions (the real-life effect) Now watch what happens. Old mode (feeling-based) A job offer comes in. Evan thinks: “Does this align with my purpose?” “Does it feel meaningful enough?” He debates. He rationalizes. He second-guesses. New mode (constraint-based) Same offer. His thinking is shorter: “This role would require me to pretend to care about things I don’t believe in.” “That’s not survivable.” Decision made. No inspiration required. The crucial difference Feeling-based purpose: Needs to be refreshed Needs to feel alive Needs reinforcement Competes with boredom Constraint-based purpose: Operates automatically Persists through boredom Narrows choices over time Becomes stricter, not weaker Evan doesn’t wake up thinking: “I’m living my purpose today.” He wakes up thinking: “Some options are off the table.” The takeaway: A real purpose doesn’t motivate you — it makes certain paths impossible. --- Analogy: Imagine someone who used to eat junk food freely, then later can’t. Not because of willpower. Not because of beliefs. But because: Their body reacts badly Inflammation Brain fog Mood crashes Now junk food is “impossible.” They can eat it. But they won’t say: “I just don’t feel inspired to.” They’ll say: “It fucks me up.” That’s the same mechanism. Purpose works the same way when real. Why motivation language confuses this Motivation is episodic. Constraints are homeostatic. Motivation: Pushes from behind Comes and goes Requires energy Constraints: Pull from ahead Operate silently Reduce degrees of freedom

If she were ugly, would it bother you the same?

You should not be blindsided by the possibility that women will find someone else they want to sex. It's always a possibility when they aren't getting everything they want from you. I was able to use contemplation to uproot this intense fear/pain by imagining my gfs having sex with someone else. Almost like exposure therapy. Eventually, I was able to let go of negativity about it. If a girl is cheating, that means the relationship isn't going good for her, and it's her prerogative to sleep with whoever she wants. I think this fear or pain naturally subsides to a degree as you get older. My last gf sent me a letter in the mail to tell me she had met someone new (she was in rehab at the time - and yes, she left me for a junky, lol). I'll never forget reading the letter on the porch swing - sun was shining. I just smiled and felt relief, like a new man with the world as my oyster.

I agree. Isolating things like this would develop competency much faster. I'm 1500 ELO rapid and I've never dove into how to properly work the pawns, and I've lost many games because of it, so something as simple as this is really good.

I tested it out. Pretty cool man! Good for practice.

Enormous implications. Quick! Sweep this under the rug before it does damage.

I can do the same thing in a mall food court. I think that's all the dodges you can make on this point. So either idk wtf I'm talking about and am self-deceived, or you're just prematurely rejecting an alternative path to ToM. It's not about expecting a perfect measure bro. It's that the test misses a whole category of high ToM people, such as myself. I've demonstrated an alternative approach that works as well or better than affective attunement. I don't expect you to trust my self-reports but I can assure you, I'm not making this shit up. To say that I have higher ToM than most NTs is an understatement. My theory on why my ToM developed as it did is that it's a trauma response from childhood. My mom was very aloof, volatile, and often violent. I probably felt I needed to read minds to survive. So, if the affective attunement option isn't available, there are other ways to get there.

This is why it's important to learn about ND - so you can more easily accept things like this about yourself. Imagine if you totally accepted that you're just always going to be an awkward hugger and that didn't bother you. Does that feel like it would be a relief to not have to worry about such stuff? Accept who you are. Just be a weird mother fucker who gets awkward when it's time to hug. Embrace that as who you are. If anyone asks "what's up with that guy?" You say "I'm autistic bitch, what's your excuse?" Or, you could just invest a bunch of time and energy into fighting your nature to get good at something you probably don't even really care about.

I think there are a few outliers here that aren't ND. My guess is it's something like 92-98% ND.

Actualized.org’s hardcore fan base all share things in common besides just their interests. The claim is that there is something psychologically fundamental that clusters them together. Goth people are all different, but they usually arrive at being goth from the same structure. They share psychological attributes and similar experiences.

Some grandma cohorts like to swim at the Y with other grandmas, some like to sew quilts in solitude. We can extrapolate one group is more extroverted. But “extroverted grandma” is not high resolution - we can’t tell very much from that. So let’s look at a higher resolution profile. If a goth person with tats, piercings, wears all black, and hangs out with other goth people at goth clubs banging to heavy metal, this is a much higher resolution profile. If you immerse yourself into that profile and become goth yourself, you can build high resolution understanding of them without knowing every single thing about them.

Bingo!