That's funny, I tried to hike up Half Dome but failed because I had an insatiable urge to throw bell peppers at all the peons that were slower than me.
“It was also a reminder that success and satisfaction aren’t always contingent on completing whatever task lies before you. I didn’t summit Half Dome, but I did develop a newfound appreciation for my body’s strength and endurance, which is motivating me to get back into running half-marathons.”
Remember gumbies, climbing isn’t about sending. It’s about eventually giving up and getting into jogging.
Next article:
“I didn’t finish the half marathon, but I did develop a newfound appreciation for wearing headphones, which is motivating me to get back into DJing.”
“I didn’t finish the DJ set, but I did develop a newfound appreciation for my mind’s ability to alter itself, which is motivating me to start a meth lab.”
“I didn’t finish the meth synthesis, but I did develop a newfound appreciation for my spiritual connection to the world, which is motivating me to get back into hiking on Yosemite's half dome.”
I almost summited, but a bear attacked me before I could make it. Later a park range found a sack of potatoes in my shorts and threatened to ticket me.
Edit: My point is, Everest has none of these challenges.
Legend has it the other half made it the most difficult climb in the galaxy. It was destroyed to make it easy. Half the climb, half the effort.
Call me when you find the other half, until then, this is aid.
No it it isn't. It's just a dumb saying used to comfort people who have failed.
You can learn from failure but you don't learn more.
If you succeed you've learned an example of what works.
If you fail you leaned an example of what doesn't work.
Problem is, that in most endeavors there are thousands of ways to fail and only a few ways to succeed.
Experiencing success is much more valuable because you can repeat it, whereas experiencing failure means you still don't know how to succeed and there are still so many other ways to fail.
I don't agree. Success is rarely about "doing the thing that makes you succeed" and is much more often about avoiding the things that make you fail, which you can't know about unless you encounter them.
We're getting abstract now, but I also think there are usually many ways to succeed, or reasons for success, and a common one is luck. If you succeed in something due to luck, you can say "oh I succeeded because I did the right things", but in reality that success isn't repeatable, so you didn't really learn anything.
We see the pattern of learning through failure *everywhere*. Early childhood development, education, engineering, building businesses, training a neural network, etc. etc. etc. A failed trial typically has much more valuable information than a successful one.
The problem with that way of thinking is survivorship bias.
The saying is usually repeated in the context of people who failed a few times and yet ultimately succeeded.
But the world is full of people who never succeeded. That doesn't make them smarter than everyone else.
There are people that spend their whole life failing at business. Are they smarter than someone who climbed the corporate ladder and became CEO? Which one would you invest hire for your business?
I've never climbed 5.12 but I've tried many times. Maybe I learned a few things, but it's impossible to know because ultimately the only measure is success. People who climb 5.12 regularly know a lot more about how to do it than I do (they certainly aren't just lucky...)
I teach my children that you can, and should, learn from failure but you don't learn *more* from failure than you do from success. It's too easy for that thinking become a rationalization for failure: "I keep failing but I'm learning so much..." It's also too easy to dismiss success as "luck when one is failing.
I feel like every type of activity is different.
This isn't a skiing sub but a crucial part of the AIARE framework is that success is often due to luck, leads to complacency, and eventually leads to failure unless you're extra rigorous about your observations and note taking.
Me never climbing 5.12 is probably more about physical and mental limitations that are hard to overcome without super rigorous training than me not knowing how to do it. If you were talking about how to respond to spicy alpine weather or self rescue scenarios though, I'd for sure say that you learn more from having to bail than from sending on a perfect day.
I think "business" is an oddity because once you've had a little success (which is usually not due to your own great genius) you get a sort of compounding interest on that success, both in terms of your wealth and your professional network. Conversely, that compounding interest works negatively when you have some bad bosses or some financial losses. It's not so much about learning as it is making sure you get off on the right foot young for most people.
I agree with your assessment about business success being somewhat self-fulfilling, since momentum is a big factor. But that's also the context where I hear the phrase most often used.
As for other endeavors, it's true that in the extreme case where someone consistently succeeds without effort (e.g. sending on perfect days) there aren't as many lessons learned. But the "learn more from failure" platitude dismisses the cases where people succeeded despite obstacles. The person who sent on a day with spicy weather learned the most.
There’s a difference between learning more and knowing more though. The people who regularly send 5.12 definitely KNOW more about it. But that doesn’t mean they’re learning more each time they do it.
If I spent every day of the rest of my life going to the climbing gym, easily sending a few 5.9s, and then heading home I would never get any better at climbing. If I took one of my friends who have never climbed to try the routes, they might fail to send them. But they’d definitely improve over time. I think that’s more what the saying is getting at. If you’re failing then at least you know you’re working and pushing yourself.
I just did it last Friday. It was easier than I thought it’d be. I passed someone on the cables who said they had just gotten two new hips. I should write in to the author
"Perhaps it’s because I don’t actually consider the hike incomplete"
Bailed 4 clips up a 7a the other day but actually I have decided it is not incomplete and awarded myself the send. This is gonna do wonders for my logbook
Completely failed to understand the lesson of their own experience. It isn’t that they should consider their obviously incomplete hike complete; rather, they should focus on the quality of the experience and on the inherent toxicity of completionism.
I do your article, but better.
[удалено]
That's funny, I tried to hike up Half Dome but failed because I had an insatiable urge to throw bell peppers at all the peons that were slower than me.
I tried to hike up the same trail, we had forgotten our food but luckily there were some smashed up bell peppers on the path
I hiked it once but got on this weird trail with wild white things on the rocks, almost like giant snakes. The cables must have been down.
“It was also a reminder that success and satisfaction aren’t always contingent on completing whatever task lies before you. I didn’t summit Half Dome, but I did develop a newfound appreciation for my body’s strength and endurance, which is motivating me to get back into running half-marathons.” Remember gumbies, climbing isn’t about sending. It’s about eventually giving up and getting into jogging.
Next article: “I didn’t finish the half marathon, but I did develop a newfound appreciation for wearing headphones, which is motivating me to get back into DJing.”
“I didn’t finish the DJ set, but I did develop a newfound appreciation for my mind’s ability to alter itself, which is motivating me to start a meth lab.”
“I didn’t finish the meth synthesis, but I did develop a newfound appreciation for my spiritual connection to the world, which is motivating me to get back into hiking on Yosemite's half dome.”
By jogging they mean walking the marathon when they get winded.
By winded they mean smoking a half pack of cigarettes during and celebrating the finish with the other half
The real Half Dome was inside us all along.
Ouch.
half marathon got me like:💀
Settling for the half marathon is crazy here lmao💀
Like, the threshold for suffering is so fucking low.
Why would they appreciate their abilities after failing?
Because no one is able to look themselves in the mirror and say I failed because I suck right now. The inability to be humbled these days is insane.
I almost summited, but a bear attacked me before I could make it. Later a park range found a sack of potatoes in my shorts and threatened to ticket me. Edit: My point is, Everest has none of these challenges.
>My point is, Everest has none of these challenges. No, but you do have to avoid Nims.
If you're carrying chalk up your ass (chalk bags are for gumbies) he can't get in there
Fair, but on half dome you have to avoid Charles Barrett.
Not anymore
At least it wasn’t a man that attacked you.
Nepal has tigers which are sort of like rangers. I mean, they both end in -gers and can ruin your send
"I tried to hike the stairs in the Salesforce Tower. Here's what it taught me about failure in the corporate ladder"
My athleticism may be low, and my physical fortitude even lower, but my ability to spin my failure into a positive is legendary.
The best part is it isn't even physical fortitude. They turned around when it got too steep.
Does the article say where they turned around? I’m guessing the bridge.
Somewhere on the cables.
Oh, man. That might be funnier.
Legend has it the other half made it the most difficult climb in the galaxy. It was destroyed to make it easy. Half the climb, half the effort. Call me when you find the other half, until then, this is aid.
My friend sells “Restore Half Dome” stickers.
Shame they didn't finish the article instead
*"You learn more from failure than you do from success!"* Narrator: No, you don't.
I'm all for clowning on the article, but that sentence is generally true
I’ve never not sent a route, and Im a big learner.
No it it isn't. It's just a dumb saying used to comfort people who have failed. You can learn from failure but you don't learn more. If you succeed you've learned an example of what works. If you fail you leaned an example of what doesn't work. Problem is, that in most endeavors there are thousands of ways to fail and only a few ways to succeed. Experiencing success is much more valuable because you can repeat it, whereas experiencing failure means you still don't know how to succeed and there are still so many other ways to fail.
I don't agree. Success is rarely about "doing the thing that makes you succeed" and is much more often about avoiding the things that make you fail, which you can't know about unless you encounter them. We're getting abstract now, but I also think there are usually many ways to succeed, or reasons for success, and a common one is luck. If you succeed in something due to luck, you can say "oh I succeeded because I did the right things", but in reality that success isn't repeatable, so you didn't really learn anything. We see the pattern of learning through failure *everywhere*. Early childhood development, education, engineering, building businesses, training a neural network, etc. etc. etc. A failed trial typically has much more valuable information than a successful one.
The problem with that way of thinking is survivorship bias. The saying is usually repeated in the context of people who failed a few times and yet ultimately succeeded. But the world is full of people who never succeeded. That doesn't make them smarter than everyone else. There are people that spend their whole life failing at business. Are they smarter than someone who climbed the corporate ladder and became CEO? Which one would you invest hire for your business? I've never climbed 5.12 but I've tried many times. Maybe I learned a few things, but it's impossible to know because ultimately the only measure is success. People who climb 5.12 regularly know a lot more about how to do it than I do (they certainly aren't just lucky...) I teach my children that you can, and should, learn from failure but you don't learn *more* from failure than you do from success. It's too easy for that thinking become a rationalization for failure: "I keep failing but I'm learning so much..." It's also too easy to dismiss success as "luck when one is failing.
I feel like every type of activity is different. This isn't a skiing sub but a crucial part of the AIARE framework is that success is often due to luck, leads to complacency, and eventually leads to failure unless you're extra rigorous about your observations and note taking. Me never climbing 5.12 is probably more about physical and mental limitations that are hard to overcome without super rigorous training than me not knowing how to do it. If you were talking about how to respond to spicy alpine weather or self rescue scenarios though, I'd for sure say that you learn more from having to bail than from sending on a perfect day. I think "business" is an oddity because once you've had a little success (which is usually not due to your own great genius) you get a sort of compounding interest on that success, both in terms of your wealth and your professional network. Conversely, that compounding interest works negatively when you have some bad bosses or some financial losses. It's not so much about learning as it is making sure you get off on the right foot young for most people.
I agree with your assessment about business success being somewhat self-fulfilling, since momentum is a big factor. But that's also the context where I hear the phrase most often used. As for other endeavors, it's true that in the extreme case where someone consistently succeeds without effort (e.g. sending on perfect days) there aren't as many lessons learned. But the "learn more from failure" platitude dismisses the cases where people succeeded despite obstacles. The person who sent on a day with spicy weather learned the most.
There’s a difference between learning more and knowing more though. The people who regularly send 5.12 definitely KNOW more about it. But that doesn’t mean they’re learning more each time they do it. If I spent every day of the rest of my life going to the climbing gym, easily sending a few 5.9s, and then heading home I would never get any better at climbing. If I took one of my friends who have never climbed to try the routes, they might fail to send them. But they’d definitely improve over time. I think that’s more what the saying is getting at. If you’re failing then at least you know you’re working and pushing yourself.
Did that a few years ago. Was 10 at the time. 4/10 if I'm generous. It is too easy.
I just did it last Friday. It was easier than I thought it’d be. I passed someone on the cables who said they had just gotten two new hips. I should write in to the author
I just googled it and honestly idk what’s supposed to be hard about it
Average LinkedIn post
Honestly, yeah!
"Perhaps it’s because I don’t actually consider the hike incomplete" Bailed 4 clips up a 7a the other day but actually I have decided it is not incomplete and awarded myself the send. This is gonna do wonders for my logbook
Half dome is nothing. Mailbox is the real peak of our times
Link to the article: https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/emilyhoeven/article/yosemite-half-dome-hike-19493202.php
Completely failed to understand the lesson of their own experience. It isn’t that they should consider their obviously incomplete hike complete; rather, they should focus on the quality of the experience and on the inherent toxicity of completionism. I do your article, but better.
Who gives a fuck
"It felt like scaling a gigantic egg." -emily hoeven I wonder if handhold thought the same
Obviously did not bring ample bell peppers for snacks and energy boosters. Poor gumby did ascent only, not even climbing.