I agree largely! At a certain point we must build our own worldview, a functioning philosophy to traverse the world.
I disagree, though, that a microphilosophy should be inherently coherent without contradiction. I think we can have different selves within us coexisting, and not just one unified self. The tension between different ideas is what lets us learn and adapt and grow. Besides, I think it's ok to not have some things sorted out - to exist in uncertainty. I don't know if I believe in a god or not but I'm open to it. But nothing revolves around this mere idea shift, because I intend to do good with my life anyway. Something about contradiction is inherently human - we should not try to cut off all dissenting voices and go with the loudest one, we should instead support an internal dialogue.
Same thing with principles, no one thing will always be good. Say you're a governmental agent with codes to a nuclear bomb, and a criminal is threatening you. Should you be honest? No, millions of lives would be at stake. No one principal can provide a framework for all of the chaos of life, unless it's a principle of adaptivity, or one to describe *most* scenarios.
I am so glad that you recognized the need for building a worldview to make it through this complex world.
I appreciate you challenging me on the strict logical consistency requirements that I have built into the micro-philosophy concept. In practice, I agree that everyone will have some internal tensions and contradictions that may never get fully ironed out, but I still think we should hold logical consistency as an ideal to strive for. What is the alternative? I also think that logical contradiction is a bit more narrow and strict than what you seem to be describing as tension or differing viewpoints. I agree that we should embrace disagreement and alternative viewpoints.
We also have the option to suspend judgment on topics that exceed our knowledge. I think we must be careful to avoid asserting positive statements that are contradictory in particular.
Regarding the principles, to think that no one thing is intrinsically good is to simply deny a principle that many people hold. I certainly don't think an entire worldview can be reduced to a single principle (it lacks enough content to meaningfully say everything that needs to be said).
Thanks so much for raising these criticisms, they offer me a great opportunity to clarify how I am presenting these ideas and engage in a meaningful philosophical discussion with readers!
That’s right Emerson. Distractions and powerful forces that make it incredibly difficult to think for oneself. Your survival can be threatened by having the wrong ideas.
It takes great strength to craft your own path based on philosophy and ideologies that befit your circumstances.
The sad thing is that we are raised to be conformists - getting programmed on principles, some of which are outdated and while might have benefitted your ancestors, limit or at times set you up for failure.
Most people lack the strength to pursue an alternative path, as the price of non-conformism comes with alienation, abandonment (from the conformists), and even crippling despair and anxiety (as you don’t know what your non-conformism will lead to - whether it could lead to your annihilation)
Quoting Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor: “The mystery of human existence is not just in staying alive, but in finding something to live for. Without a firm idea of what he is to live for, man will not accept life and will rather destroy himself than remain on earth, though he have bread.”
Perhaps conformist concepts and spiritual themes have a purpose - to quell the otherwise existential dread and burden associated with forming your own path, by passing down dogma and routine to the general populace who can’t handle the burden of freedom.
I think the Grand Inquisitor had an accurate evaluation of human nature, and I guess to keep society stable his actions seem perhaps reasonable. Anyway, I have digressed far enough.
Despite the hurdles associated with true freedom, there are limitless possibilities that can be unlocked by adopting spiritual systems that best fit your circumstances aka non-conformity.
I happen to agree, just based on my observations, that the willingness to partake in conformist tendencies can certainly be found in the desire to escape existential dread. I'm sure you've seen the experiment where when given the choice between sitting bored in a room or electrocuting themselves for entertainment, many people chose the latter. Implying that even pain is preferred to nothing, then implying that conforming is more comfortable than being lost (existential dread).
Although I'm certain that there are many other factors that could contribute to conformist tendencies. You would probably have to study on a case-by-case basis to work them out.
Yes, I think human beings are different from other animals in the sense that we have an innate thirst - a thirst for meaning and that never silences itself unless quenched.
I admit that it is difficult for quench this thirst, and most people would rather partake in dirty water (which is readily available)than find a fountain with clear waters.
While there might be other factors, this innate desire is definitely the biggest contributor.
Thank you for the wonderful article! I have done this for many years and have drawn pictures of how I see it on my mind, and written thousands of pages of ‘epiphanies’.
I only recently started studying neuroscience and philosophy, and some of it felt more like validation of my own thoughts moreso than studying. My micro-philosophy came from pain, and from being naturally curious, naturally wanting to connect to other humans, naturally having a desire for peace. My struggle is how to share this very personal writing, art, and ideas. My hurdle is consistent execution.
Thanks for sharing. Pain can often be the greatest source of truth. I would love to learn more about your micro-philosophical beliefs that you have arrived at some time.
I agree, Paul, that an unexamined life can still be worth living and can contribute to society in its own way. However, I also believe that true self-awareness is challenging and often painful, especially for those who’ve experienced significant trauma in their lives.
Response to Paul Musso's "Why You Need A Micro-Philosophy (If You Want To Become An Independent Thinker)" at "The Micro Philosopher"
This is a great article. I will steal the term "micro-philosophy" because I've been wondering what to call my own micro-philosophy (which I have named for various reasons "The Omega Concept.")
That's what my Substack "The Five Essentials" is all about. The Five Essentials are: 1) Philosophy, 2) Attitude, 3) Knowledge, 4) Skills, and 5) Technology. All are needed to achieve the primary goal of life: survival, continuity of existence. I write my Substack precisely to clarify my thinking about all this, like you do.
However, I still find myself : "read[ing] hundreds of books, watch[ing] thousands of videos, listen[ing] to endless podcasts and never be able to take that information and do something with it."
Richard, thanks for this. We are all working on it, haha. I don't want to suggest that we should not consume a significant amount of content to help us grow. I am usually pushing my mind to its limits every week. But the more you are working on clearly defined projects and WRITING, the more you will have natural ways to apply all of that information and organize it. I have been finding myself reading less and writing more recently, but the reading is more meaningful now.
This is really interesting. I couldn’t see anywhere where you recommend starting to build your MP. Maybe that’s coming. For me I think it would be easier to start with actions and go backwards to the core belief. I think the further towards the core belief that I go, the more uncertain it becomes
This is interesting. I actually have thought about whether a micro-philosophy can be built bi-directionally. I personally think it can. I talk about this a bit in my latest piece where you can work backwards from actions to discovering core values.
I talk about how to build your own micro-philosophy in most of my recent articles starting with "How To Discover Your Core Beliefs".
Perhaps this is also why a little knowledge is dangerous. It has no guiding frame. Great concept Paul and chimes with my mindful scepticism. More power to you.
Thank you for giving a name to something I've stayed faithful to my entire life (my micro-philosophy) but could never speak about from the standpoint of an easily understandable concept. I never fit in groups and definitely don't fit in with the philosophy crowd (though I tried for a bit). Because of your writing, I realize it's not because something is wrong with me, it's because of one fundamental difference. While most attempt to fit themselves into a philosophy, I fit philosophy into my life. Not arbitrarily, but in terms of the highly individualized way I see the world due to copious amounts of context and nuance gathered throughout my lifetime. You've opened up a fountain of ideas in my mind. Thank you!
Thanks so much for taking the time to share this note. Giving names to things is incredibly important, and I am so glad that you feel like this captured something you have understood for years. I really like the way you put the point of fitting philosophy into your life. Philosophy is distinct from the community or institutionalization of philosophy and, yes, sometimes the way philosophy is taught or embodied in certain groups can make it inaccessible. It means a lot to me that I made philosophy more accessible for you, because that is something I always aspire to do.
Paul, this is brilliant. I’ve been making my way back to philosophy as a discipline (and maybe way of life) for the past year+. The ideas of others (dead philosophers mostly) help me think, frame questions, identify blind spots, even open new worlds for me, but I often linger in the wilderness with respect to my own beliefs. I’m equally interested in teasing out to what extent much of my behavior and actions really stem from mistaken beliefs about myself and the world. As others have mentioned, it is indeed pain and curiosity that have always brought me back to philosophy. I’m also fascinated by what James Clear has done with atomic habits. You’re taking it a step further by helping us unearth the entire scaffolding that underlies our actions.
Thanks so much for leaving this note. It means a lot to me that you took the time to do so. I spent many years studying philosophy as both an undergraduate and a graduate student, and once I started writing online, I realized how truly difficult it is to take everything we learn from others and apply it to our own lives in a meaningful way. I am really glad you can see what I am pursuing through my writing. There is a long way to go, but I can't wait to get to work making it easier for as many people as possible to understand themselves philosophically.
@Paul Musso- I absolutely love what you are laying down here from a lived experience perspective and tying this together with learning how to think for yourself over time. There is nothing wrong with reading books unless you don't understand how to apply the principles in the book to your own way of thinking. It's why 95% of self-help books are basically worthless because of their prescriptive nature.
From my vantage point and how I think given what I do for a living - I call it "Mental Equations of Living." In essene, how do we think about ourselves as deeply as possible and over time come to understand who we are and why we live our lives the way we do. To get to the "Good Life", as I think you are indicating, we need to be able to tie thought with action and live that out in regard to what is unique about ourselves. I'm loving this newsletter and I want more. That is a good sign. Well done Paul!
I love the concept of "Mental Equations of Living" - it beautifully captures the process of deeply understanding ourselves and aligning thought with action. You’re absolutely right that self-help often falls short because it prescribes rather than equips, making independent thinking even more crucial. The real challenge is not just absorbing knowledge but integrating it into a framework that is uniquely our own.
Love this conversation. I relate to your ‘mental equations’. I refer to mine as ‘emotional calculations’. I’m neurodivergent and my mind does not cease; the pictures in my head, the mental math, the constant connection of dots. It can be exhausting, but I prefer it to the quiet. It feels like creativity incarnate.
@Paul Musso Interesting you should raise that quesiton. I have a piece on Mental Equations and looking at them like math equations. I should have the piece out here on Monday or Tuesday. I’m trying to shoot for Monday.
Are you by chance a fan of Ludwig Wittgenstein? I started reading him a few months ago and was so excited to find him. In my humble opinion, life is math.
Interesting you should ask that question. While I am in no way an expert on Wittgenstein, I do think modern psychoanalysis owes the man a great debt of gratitude. Wittgenstein, as you likely know, found language and its meaning to be socially/context dependent. His ideas were similar to Freud's in that Freud viewed the unconscious as structured like a language and not set or rigid and influenced by social context as well.
I love the idea that life is math - I might add life is similar in many ways to math concepts, different in other important ways, and their applications to higher math equations. Mind you, my dear mother was a math teacher/professor. So my "interpretation of life" and math therein is socially and contextually dependent to say the least.
Thank you for the Wittgenstein-Freud connection. As part of my own micro-philosophy I try to find ways to simplify language. We can all use the same word and it will take on a different meaning for each of us (other languages often seem more concise than English, because they convey emotions more clearly). For me, math is language’s simplest form, it’s all about the substitution and key you apply in order to convey thoughts. I’ve also been doing this in my paintings with color; I paint my emotions and give them physical form.
I love that you mention your mother was a math teacher and influenced your interpretation of life. For me, I like to say my mother was Love and my father was Logic, and that equation made me; logically emotional, or emotionally logical.
I've tried my best to address this in my writing. As I do what could be described as self-help, I make a conscious effort to weave in my personal experiences, feelings, thoughts, reactions, and any other relevant human experiences to give depth to my writing.
To avoid providing descriptive only advice that's detached from human experiences. While certainly more subjective in its nature, I feel that it gives a greater account of the human experience. Not only that, but it usually includes the actual context in which the lesson was learnt, to give furth understand to the lesson being offered.
Thinking for yourself is not about consuming more information but about developing a personal framework through which knowledge becomes actionable. Many fall into the illusion that reading books, watching lectures, or absorbing high-quality content will automatically transform them. Yet, without an internal structure - a lens through which to interpret, challenge, and apply ideas - knowledge remains passive. True intellectual maturity requires the courage to construct a worldview that is uniquely your own, one that allows you to navigate life’s complexities with clarity and purpose. This means questioning assumptions, examining beliefs, and embracing the discomfort of forming independent thoughts rather than relying on pre-made identities or external validation.
The challenge, however, is that modern society discourages independent thinking at every turn. Education often prioritizes memorization over inquiry, and culture rewards conformity over depth. The philosopher Kant argued that enlightenment is the ability to use one’s understanding without guidance from another - yet few are taught how to do this. The key is not just to think, but to think rigorously, to build a micro-philosophy that is coherent, practical, and deeply personal. Without this, we risk living lives shaped by external forces rather than by conscious choice. The path to true self-knowledge is difficult, but it is the only path to genuine freedom.
What a rich discussion, thanks to you both. I happen to be a huge fan of Wittgenstein, especially his late philosophy.
I agree largely! At a certain point we must build our own worldview, a functioning philosophy to traverse the world.
I disagree, though, that a microphilosophy should be inherently coherent without contradiction. I think we can have different selves within us coexisting, and not just one unified self. The tension between different ideas is what lets us learn and adapt and grow. Besides, I think it's ok to not have some things sorted out - to exist in uncertainty. I don't know if I believe in a god or not but I'm open to it. But nothing revolves around this mere idea shift, because I intend to do good with my life anyway. Something about contradiction is inherently human - we should not try to cut off all dissenting voices and go with the loudest one, we should instead support an internal dialogue.
Same thing with principles, no one thing will always be good. Say you're a governmental agent with codes to a nuclear bomb, and a criminal is threatening you. Should you be honest? No, millions of lives would be at stake. No one principal can provide a framework for all of the chaos of life, unless it's a principle of adaptivity, or one to describe *most* scenarios.
Azark,
Thanks so much for this awesome comment.
I am so glad that you recognized the need for building a worldview to make it through this complex world.
I appreciate you challenging me on the strict logical consistency requirements that I have built into the micro-philosophy concept. In practice, I agree that everyone will have some internal tensions and contradictions that may never get fully ironed out, but I still think we should hold logical consistency as an ideal to strive for. What is the alternative? I also think that logical contradiction is a bit more narrow and strict than what you seem to be describing as tension or differing viewpoints. I agree that we should embrace disagreement and alternative viewpoints.
We also have the option to suspend judgment on topics that exceed our knowledge. I think we must be careful to avoid asserting positive statements that are contradictory in particular.
Regarding the principles, to think that no one thing is intrinsically good is to simply deny a principle that many people hold. I certainly don't think an entire worldview can be reduced to a single principle (it lacks enough content to meaningfully say everything that needs to be said).
Thanks so much for raising these criticisms, they offer me a great opportunity to clarify how I am presenting these ideas and engage in a meaningful philosophical discussion with readers!
Really love this idea! It's something we all need to put forth energy towards but rarely do, due to the myriad of distractions we face today.
That’s right Emerson. Distractions and powerful forces that make it incredibly difficult to think for oneself. Your survival can be threatened by having the wrong ideas.
This is a great piece.
It takes great strength to craft your own path based on philosophy and ideologies that befit your circumstances.
The sad thing is that we are raised to be conformists - getting programmed on principles, some of which are outdated and while might have benefitted your ancestors, limit or at times set you up for failure.
Most people lack the strength to pursue an alternative path, as the price of non-conformism comes with alienation, abandonment (from the conformists), and even crippling despair and anxiety (as you don’t know what your non-conformism will lead to - whether it could lead to your annihilation)
Quoting Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor: “The mystery of human existence is not just in staying alive, but in finding something to live for. Without a firm idea of what he is to live for, man will not accept life and will rather destroy himself than remain on earth, though he have bread.”
Perhaps conformist concepts and spiritual themes have a purpose - to quell the otherwise existential dread and burden associated with forming your own path, by passing down dogma and routine to the general populace who can’t handle the burden of freedom.
I think the Grand Inquisitor had an accurate evaluation of human nature, and I guess to keep society stable his actions seem perhaps reasonable. Anyway, I have digressed far enough.
Despite the hurdles associated with true freedom, there are limitless possibilities that can be unlocked by adopting spiritual systems that best fit your circumstances aka non-conformity.
I happen to agree, just based on my observations, that the willingness to partake in conformist tendencies can certainly be found in the desire to escape existential dread. I'm sure you've seen the experiment where when given the choice between sitting bored in a room or electrocuting themselves for entertainment, many people chose the latter. Implying that even pain is preferred to nothing, then implying that conforming is more comfortable than being lost (existential dread).
Although I'm certain that there are many other factors that could contribute to conformist tendencies. You would probably have to study on a case-by-case basis to work them out.
Yes, I think human beings are different from other animals in the sense that we have an innate thirst - a thirst for meaning and that never silences itself unless quenched.
I admit that it is difficult for quench this thirst, and most people would rather partake in dirty water (which is readily available)than find a fountain with clear waters.
While there might be other factors, this innate desire is definitely the biggest contributor.
I would agree 👏
Thank you for the wonderful article! I have done this for many years and have drawn pictures of how I see it on my mind, and written thousands of pages of ‘epiphanies’.
I only recently started studying neuroscience and philosophy, and some of it felt more like validation of my own thoughts moreso than studying. My micro-philosophy came from pain, and from being naturally curious, naturally wanting to connect to other humans, naturally having a desire for peace. My struggle is how to share this very personal writing, art, and ideas. My hurdle is consistent execution.
I look forward to reading more from you.
Thanks for sharing. Pain can often be the greatest source of truth. I would love to learn more about your micro-philosophical beliefs that you have arrived at some time.
Awesome job Paul! I look forward to your next newsletter.
Congratulations on getting startes
Thanks Brian.
Looking forward to Twin Dad. I am not going to stop pushing you until I see it! haha
I've started putting together my KoreNotes and outlining everything
I agree, Paul, that an unexamined life can still be worth living and can contribute to society in its own way. However, I also believe that true self-awareness is challenging and often painful, especially for those who’ve experienced significant trauma in their lives.
Bette,
I think self-awareness is definitely one of the hardest things to pursue, and I agree that trauma complicates things even more, unforuntately.
Response to Paul Musso's "Why You Need A Micro-Philosophy (If You Want To Become An Independent Thinker)" at "The Micro Philosopher"
This is a great article. I will steal the term "micro-philosophy" because I've been wondering what to call my own micro-philosophy (which I have named for various reasons "The Omega Concept.")
That's what my Substack "The Five Essentials" is all about. The Five Essentials are: 1) Philosophy, 2) Attitude, 3) Knowledge, 4) Skills, and 5) Technology. All are needed to achieve the primary goal of life: survival, continuity of existence. I write my Substack precisely to clarify my thinking about all this, like you do.
However, I still find myself : "read[ing] hundreds of books, watch[ing] thousands of videos, listen[ing] to endless podcasts and never be able to take that information and do something with it."
But I'm working on it.
Richard, thanks for this. We are all working on it, haha. I don't want to suggest that we should not consume a significant amount of content to help us grow. I am usually pushing my mind to its limits every week. But the more you are working on clearly defined projects and WRITING, the more you will have natural ways to apply all of that information and organize it. I have been finding myself reading less and writing more recently, but the reading is more meaningful now.
This is really interesting. I couldn’t see anywhere where you recommend starting to build your MP. Maybe that’s coming. For me I think it would be easier to start with actions and go backwards to the core belief. I think the further towards the core belief that I go, the more uncertain it becomes
Liam,
This is interesting. I actually have thought about whether a micro-philosophy can be built bi-directionally. I personally think it can. I talk about this a bit in my latest piece where you can work backwards from actions to discovering core values.
I talk about how to build your own micro-philosophy in most of my recent articles starting with "How To Discover Your Core Beliefs".
Thanks for this comment.
Perhaps this is also why a little knowledge is dangerous. It has no guiding frame. Great concept Paul and chimes with my mindful scepticism. More power to you.
This is a great point. Knowledge by itself can be harmful or useless, but given a proper frame it becomes amplified for good.
Thank you for giving a name to something I've stayed faithful to my entire life (my micro-philosophy) but could never speak about from the standpoint of an easily understandable concept. I never fit in groups and definitely don't fit in with the philosophy crowd (though I tried for a bit). Because of your writing, I realize it's not because something is wrong with me, it's because of one fundamental difference. While most attempt to fit themselves into a philosophy, I fit philosophy into my life. Not arbitrarily, but in terms of the highly individualized way I see the world due to copious amounts of context and nuance gathered throughout my lifetime. You've opened up a fountain of ideas in my mind. Thank you!
Rebecca,
Thanks so much for taking the time to share this note. Giving names to things is incredibly important, and I am so glad that you feel like this captured something you have understood for years. I really like the way you put the point of fitting philosophy into your life. Philosophy is distinct from the community or institutionalization of philosophy and, yes, sometimes the way philosophy is taught or embodied in certain groups can make it inaccessible. It means a lot to me that I made philosophy more accessible for you, because that is something I always aspire to do.
Paul, this is brilliant. I’ve been making my way back to philosophy as a discipline (and maybe way of life) for the past year+. The ideas of others (dead philosophers mostly) help me think, frame questions, identify blind spots, even open new worlds for me, but I often linger in the wilderness with respect to my own beliefs. I’m equally interested in teasing out to what extent much of my behavior and actions really stem from mistaken beliefs about myself and the world. As others have mentioned, it is indeed pain and curiosity that have always brought me back to philosophy. I’m also fascinated by what James Clear has done with atomic habits. You’re taking it a step further by helping us unearth the entire scaffolding that underlies our actions.
I love this. I have my professional version dialed and present it to a lot of people but I never really thought about doing the same with my personal.
I am curious what your version looks like. Feel free to dm me about it any time!
Cue,
Thanks so much for leaving this note. It means a lot to me that you took the time to do so. I spent many years studying philosophy as both an undergraduate and a graduate student, and once I started writing online, I realized how truly difficult it is to take everything we learn from others and apply it to our own lives in a meaningful way. I am really glad you can see what I am pursuing through my writing. There is a long way to go, but I can't wait to get to work making it easier for as many people as possible to understand themselves philosophically.
@Paul Musso- I absolutely love what you are laying down here from a lived experience perspective and tying this together with learning how to think for yourself over time. There is nothing wrong with reading books unless you don't understand how to apply the principles in the book to your own way of thinking. It's why 95% of self-help books are basically worthless because of their prescriptive nature.
From my vantage point and how I think given what I do for a living - I call it "Mental Equations of Living." In essene, how do we think about ourselves as deeply as possible and over time come to understand who we are and why we live our lives the way we do. To get to the "Good Life", as I think you are indicating, we need to be able to tie thought with action and live that out in regard to what is unique about ourselves. I'm loving this newsletter and I want more. That is a good sign. Well done Paul!
I love the concept of "Mental Equations of Living" - it beautifully captures the process of deeply understanding ourselves and aligning thought with action. You’re absolutely right that self-help often falls short because it prescribes rather than equips, making independent thinking even more crucial. The real challenge is not just absorbing knowledge but integrating it into a framework that is uniquely our own.
Simon, I like the way you explained this. Self-help prescribes rather than equips and that the real challenge is integration.
Amen! 🙏
Please can you say more Paul? My curiosity light has been turned to the fully on position.
Love this conversation. I relate to your ‘mental equations’. I refer to mine as ‘emotional calculations’. I’m neurodivergent and my mind does not cease; the pictures in my head, the mental math, the constant connection of dots. It can be exhausting, but I prefer it to the quiet. It feels like creativity incarnate.
@Dr. Bronce Rice How would you say “emotional calculations” relate to your “mental equations”?
@Paul Musso Interesting you should raise that quesiton. I have a piece on Mental Equations and looking at them like math equations. I should have the piece out here on Monday or Tuesday. I’m trying to shoot for Monday.
Are you by chance a fan of Ludwig Wittgenstein? I started reading him a few months ago and was so excited to find him. In my humble opinion, life is math.
Interesting you should ask that question. While I am in no way an expert on Wittgenstein, I do think modern psychoanalysis owes the man a great debt of gratitude. Wittgenstein, as you likely know, found language and its meaning to be socially/context dependent. His ideas were similar to Freud's in that Freud viewed the unconscious as structured like a language and not set or rigid and influenced by social context as well.
I love the idea that life is math - I might add life is similar in many ways to math concepts, different in other important ways, and their applications to higher math equations. Mind you, my dear mother was a math teacher/professor. So my "interpretation of life" and math therein is socially and contextually dependent to say the least.
Thank you for the Wittgenstein-Freud connection. As part of my own micro-philosophy I try to find ways to simplify language. We can all use the same word and it will take on a different meaning for each of us (other languages often seem more concise than English, because they convey emotions more clearly). For me, math is language’s simplest form, it’s all about the substitution and key you apply in order to convey thoughts. I’ve also been doing this in my paintings with color; I paint my emotions and give them physical form.
I love that you mention your mother was a math teacher and influenced your interpretation of life. For me, I like to say my mother was Love and my father was Logic, and that equation made me; logically emotional, or emotionally logical.
I've tried my best to address this in my writing. As I do what could be described as self-help, I make a conscious effort to weave in my personal experiences, feelings, thoughts, reactions, and any other relevant human experiences to give depth to my writing.
To avoid providing descriptive only advice that's detached from human experiences. While certainly more subjective in its nature, I feel that it gives a greater account of the human experience. Not only that, but it usually includes the actual context in which the lesson was learnt, to give furth understand to the lesson being offered.
Sounds like you have a winning "mental equation of living" in my book Brady Hill 🙏 Well done.
Thinking for yourself is not about consuming more information but about developing a personal framework through which knowledge becomes actionable. Many fall into the illusion that reading books, watching lectures, or absorbing high-quality content will automatically transform them. Yet, without an internal structure - a lens through which to interpret, challenge, and apply ideas - knowledge remains passive. True intellectual maturity requires the courage to construct a worldview that is uniquely your own, one that allows you to navigate life’s complexities with clarity and purpose. This means questioning assumptions, examining beliefs, and embracing the discomfort of forming independent thoughts rather than relying on pre-made identities or external validation.
The challenge, however, is that modern society discourages independent thinking at every turn. Education often prioritizes memorization over inquiry, and culture rewards conformity over depth. The philosopher Kant argued that enlightenment is the ability to use one’s understanding without guidance from another - yet few are taught how to do this. The key is not just to think, but to think rigorously, to build a micro-philosophy that is coherent, practical, and deeply personal. Without this, we risk living lives shaped by external forces rather than by conscious choice. The path to true self-knowledge is difficult, but it is the only path to genuine freedom.
The purpose of all knowledge, wisdom, and understanding is actionable certainty.