My ebook got published on Kindle.

[Joshe]

When producing work for the public, ALL critiques are useful if they can be viewed objectively. Each critique gives you another perspective from which to look from. Collect and analyze all critiques, including @Kksd74628's. 

Here's how I interpret the critique:

• Many readers might feel the content is repackaged and a waste of the their time.
• In the marketplace of ideas, originality is like a rare gem, and people like rare gems. Rare gems sell easier than common gems. 
• You can always improve upon something by addressing its imperfections. Perfection is never reached but the degree to which you strive for it is the degree to which you'll get closer to it, which should make your product more valuable. 

Of course, the degree to which you sugarcoat things depends on the person you're critiquing. Probably not a good idea to be so direct with a 14-year old who just released their first e-book. 

Edited September 25 by Joshe

[Nemra]

@Joshe, in any case, it's important to know who you're criticizing in order to know how to tell them.

Why would a critic want to help someone if they don't even know a little bit about who they are criticizing, regardless of whether the critic is right, let's assume?

Edited September 25 by Nemra

[Joshe]

15 minutes ago, Nemra said:

@Joshe, in any case, it's important to know who you're criticizing in order to know how to tell them.

It would be weird to ask OP for his personality test results, age, and maturity level before providing a critique. 😆 But maybe that should be the norm. 

15 minutes ago, Nemra said:

Why would a critic want to help someone if they don't even know a little bit about who they are criticizing, regardless of whether the critic is right, let's assume?

Yeah, that's a good thing to think about.

Why would a stranger provide a critique to another stranger?

Why would a stranger seek another stranger's critique?

[Schizophonia]

Cool.

 

What does it talk about ?

[Rishabh R]

@Joshe I am 23. 

[Rishabh R]

@Schizophonia It's a collection of insights on the question - What is the most wisest way to live life ?

[Nemra]

21 minutes ago, Joshe said:

It would be weird to ask OP for his personality test results, age, and maturity level before providing a critique. 😆 But maybe that should be the norm. 

That could also be problematic. 😁

I think being non-aggressive is a good approach for the beginning. You would learn a lot more about them before you choose to be aggressive towards them for whatever reason. Why not be a professional critic for a little bit? 😏

 

Edited September 25 by Nemra

[Schizophonia]

8 minutes ago, Rishabh R said:

@Schizophonia It's a collection of insights on the question - What is the most wisest way to live life ?

It's funny because the answer everybody would give to this question would particularly betray their personas. 

For example, I tend to think very quickly about "confrontation and adaptation".

[Rishabh R]

@Schizophonia ok but I contemplated this question for months and months sitting by myself taking time off my days.

[Joshe]

18 minutes ago, Nemra said:

I think being non-aggressive is a good approach for the beginning. You would learn a lot more about them before you choose to be aggressive towards them for whatever reason. Why not be a professional critic for a little bit? 😏

Yeah, non-aggressive is the best default. 

I think some people find it beneficial to be hard on themselves and so they think others could also benefit from it too. I've been like this and still am to a degree. It can definitely be toxic though. I've overshot this in dealing with my nephews and have felt really bad about it. But, it can also be a whip to weakness, which is commonplace, and is itself a big problem.

I think this style of critique is more favored by people who value advancement over comfort and they find comfort in being made stronger by rebuilding after each tear down.

Edited September 25 by Joshe

[Nemra]

@Joshe, I'm not saying being aggressive is bad.

I'm aggressive towards certain people. But it comes with a cost.

I think what's important is whether you are being delusional or not. I don't think anyone thinks of themselves as the delusional one.

13 minutes ago, Joshe said:

I think this style of critique is more favored by people who value advancement over comfort and they find comfort in being made stronger by each tear down. 

You mean aggressive style?

If so, then being aggressive doesn't necessarily mean you value advancement. There are lots of aggressive people out there.

Edited September 25 by Nemra

[Jacob Morres]

Congrats bro

The topics look great. 

Those topics can be extremely insightful and helpful for a lot of people. Thanks for sharing 

Edited September 25 by Jacob Morres

[El Zapato]

5 hours ago, Keryo Koffa said:

To ruin your fun & metaphoric sentiment with explicit analysis:

"The phrase "No one ever made a statue of a critic" is often attributed to Elbert Hubbard and is meant to emphasize the idea that creators and doers are celebrated more than critics. However, this isn’t entirely true in history. There are several examples of statues or memorials dedicated to critics, although they are often also writers, philosophers, or significant cultural figures.

Here are a few notable examples:

1. Jean-Paul Sartre – While known as a philosopher and existentialist writer, Sartre was also a prolific literary critic. His statues and busts are found in various parts of France.
2. Samuel Johnson – Famous for his dictionary, Johnson was also a prominent literary critic. He has a statue in Lichfield, England.
3. Matthew Arnold – A poet, cultural critic, and one of the most influential literary critics of the Victorian era, Arnold has statues and memorials dedicated to him, such as in Westminster Abbey.
4. Charles Baudelaire – The French poet and critic, often known for his critiques of art and literature, has several statues, including in Paris.
5. Edmund Burke – Although primarily known as a statesman and philosopher, Burke was also a significant cultural and literary critic, and there are multiple statues of him in London and Dublin.
6. Walter Benjamin – A critical theorist and literary critic, Benjamin has statues and memorials in Germany and elsewhere.

So, while fewer statues are made for critics compared to artists, leaders, or inventors, several well-known critics have been commemorated in statue form. Their legacy often goes beyond criticism, as many of these figures played multifaceted roles in shaping intellectual and cultural history." - ChatGPT

well, you've just burst my bubble...I was hoping to be the first one!  It is very possible they were awarded statues, despite their critiques rather than for them...  

Edited September 25 by El Zapato

[Keryo Koffa]

14 minutes ago, El Zapato said:

well, you've just burst my bubble...I was hoping to be the first one!  It is very possible they were awarded statues, despite their critiques rather than for them...  

For many of these figures, their critical work was inseparable from their broader contributions. Jean-Paul Sartre, for instance, was both a philosopher and a literary critic, and his critiques were deeply tied to his existentialist views. In such cases, it's difficult to draw a hard line between their critical and non-critical achievements. In fact, many of their critiques redefined literary, philosophical, or cultural fields, making them influential as both creators and critics.

Criticism itself can be viewed as a creative and intellectual act. Figures like Samuel Johnson or Matthew Arnold reshaped how their contemporaries and later generations understood literature and culture. The depth of their critiques created frameworks for thinking and engaging with art, much like a sculptor molds clay. The intellectual labor of critical analysis can shape society’s values, making it deserving of recognition in its own right.

Many critics were awarded recognition because their critiques were transformative. Walter Benjamin's work, for example, influenced not just literary criticism but also media theory, aesthetics, and Marxist thought. His critiques didn’t merely supplement his other contributions—they were central to the intellectual revolutions that followed.

Statues are typically awarded based on a person's overall impact on culture, society, or intellectual life. If the critiques of these individuals had significantly shaped their fields, then the statues, memorials, or accolades are not despite their critiques but because of the holistic impact their ideas—critical or otherwise—had on the world.

The argument that statues are awarded “despite” critiques seems to overlook the broader, integrative role of criticism in the cultural, intellectual, and historical achievements of many notable figures. Criticism can be as transformative as creation, and when it is, it is a valid reason for commemoration.

[Kksd74628]

@Joshe

GJ, you were the first one to get what was the hell was happening. Even boxing gym coaches are tough first to find out how pussy you are. If he sees you cry from first shout then there's something seriously wrong with the student and there's lot to overcome.

My method is rather interesting for normies and society's standards and "morals". I use being harsh and realness to filter people out who wouldn't be a match in a first place. Any real man would appreciate harsh critique and thank you rather than attacking the message delivery guy.

I don't ask people to understand me and I think that makes what I do fair, because if someone really would want to get me they wouldn't attack what I say, but be curious how in hell could I have such a crazy perspective. 

[Keryo Koffa]

18 minutes ago, Kksd74628 said:

@Joshe GJ, you were the first one to get what was the hell was happening.

@Kksd74628 I'd join this controversy gang of yours and share your sentiment but this feels like kicking puppies 😁

[Princess Arabia]

20 hours ago, Kksd74628 said:

@Michael569

That's not true. I ain't saying "the book is not for me". I am saying what I said exactly on the response which is basically "Learn to become unique and share ideas that are fresh and come from you". Probably you've seen a phenomenon in youtube where self-help videos kind of are copies of each others. You thinking of things for yourself is not enough, because your thinking already is programmed by the status quo. When you know structure so well you can spot patterns that I understood just by looking at the summary.

I am saying here something incredibly deep and I hope you get what I am trying to point at.

@Michael569 @Staples

Also don't get triggered by my radicality. That I say something exactly how I think it in my mind doesn't make it bad or good. Just my way of speaking. Get over it, bruh.

I understand where you're coming from with this. Maybe it's the way in which it was said, that seemed inappropriate especially when addressing what someone else deemed to be a major accomplishment that they showe vulnerability by sharing. 

I thought your comment was a bit crude too: but one should be open for constructive criticism if they are looking for possibilities of improvement. Treading on someone's accomplishment, though, should be approached with caution.

[Joshe]

2 hours ago, Nemra said:

You mean aggressive style?

If so, then being aggressive doesn't necessarily mean you value advancement. There are lots of aggressive people out there.

By style, I don't mean aggressive. 

Consider how Vernon Howard might yell something like "GOOD GOD MAN, LOOK AT HOW PATHETIC YOUR LITTLE EGO IS". 😂

Some people would call this cruel, over the top, and just too much, but some, myself included, appreciate it because I don't want to be pathetic, I don't want to be weak, so it's motivating. It doesn't hurt me... it jolts me and makes me say, "how am I being pathetic?". If I see the weakness I've been operating on or by, that weakness is not Vernon Howard's fault and I'm glad to have someone be blunt and direct with me. I prefer this style of communication. I don't want any sugarcoating. This is an aspect of Leo's teachings as well.

IDK the best label for this style, but "aggressive" is not it. It's coming from a good place, even though it might seem harsh or aggressive. 

Since I have no prior history to judge from, IDK if kksd's critique came from a good place or not, but I could see how it could have, so I had no reason to assume it was aggressive. If it was coming from an ego kicking down, then of course, I would condemn that, but that wasn't discernable to me from the post. 

Edited September 25 by Joshe

[El Zapato]

2 hours ago, Keryo Koffa said:

For many of these figures, their critical work was inseparable from their broader contributions. Jean-Paul Sartre, for instance, was both a philosopher and a literary critic, and his critiques were deeply tied to his existentialist views. In such cases, it's difficult to draw a hard line between their critical and non-critical achievements. In fact, many of their critiques redefined literary, philosophical, or cultural fields, making them influential as both creators and critics.

Criticism itself can be viewed as a creative and intellectual act. Figures like Samuel Johnson or Matthew Arnold reshaped how their contemporaries and later generations understood literature and culture. The depth of their critiques created frameworks for thinking and engaging with art, much like a sculptor molds clay. The intellectual labor of critical analysis can shape society’s values, making it deserving of recognition in its own right.

Many critics were awarded recognition because their critiques were transformative. Walter Benjamin's work, for example, influenced not just literary criticism but also media theory, aesthetics, and Marxist thought. His critiques didn’t merely supplement his other contributions—they were central to the intellectual revolutions that followed.

Statues are typically awarded based on a person's overall impact on culture, society, or intellectual life. If the critiques of these individuals had significantly shaped their fields, then the statues, memorials, or accolades are not despite their critiques but because of the holistic impact their ideas—critical or otherwise—had on the world.

The argument that statues are awarded “despite” critiques seems to overlook the broader, integrative role of criticism in the cultural, intellectual, and historical achievements of many notable figures. Criticism can be as transformative as creation, and when it is, it is a valid reason for commemoration.

yeah, you got me, I have to agree.  There are numerous examples of what you speak. I would even say that is the nature of it.  I don't feel so bad now...

[Rishabh R]

I wonder why @Leo Gura hasn't commented yet haha.😂