Big thing

Naval Ravikant

 helped me see is the idea that 

thinking

and the 

mind

are the root to human 

suffering

 

By living.

Everyone you admire for having learned something they learned by doing and living a life.

like 

Mark Zuckerberg

learned by building 

Facebook

  -- you know the old school 

PHP

one ?

Naval Ravikant

learned by founding startups and getting screwed out of deals and this led to him and Nivi founding Angellist and so on.

Reading books and taking classes is like eating and urinating. Sure they are required in learning and doing things... but they're not the thing. they're just necessities.

If you want to learn x go live a life of a person who needs x

the roadblock was desired in that case.

just fyi this whole series is me practicing writing like 

Kapil Gupta

who is essentially the person i'd coin as

Naval Ravikant

's biggest direct philosophical influence.

One of 

Naval Ravikant

's disciples can correct me if I'm wrong. But i believe he's saying you should be doing three separate things here?

As in if writing accomplishes #3 then you should find another one to do #1 or #2 for you... 

What Gabriel said with the addition of a

Naval Ravikant

quote.

read what you love until you love reading.

I'd like to also add that doing something at the same time reduces the discipline required. It's counter intuitive but doing something daily at a set time might seem like it takes discipline but i argue that it takes more discipline to do something everyday but at random times... because you're constantly having to use free will.

Just set a time but a short time and do it everyday. Later on you can change the time/duration/etc.

Naval Ravikant

  ===

Twitter

Jesus

I think it's a 

fool's errand

to try to focus on getting people to execute before one knows how to execute on high level themselves. 

I believe you and I are in the same boat regarding execution. We've finally stumbled upon how to execute, but we still don't do it regularly... and still are far from mastering it.

People probably pontificate how to improve the execution of others because in their head they think that if they can lead people this way somehow they can outsource all the hard work... this plus also we study a lot of already successful people and those people have reached a stage where delegation and the fostering of others' execution is the game.

However, how masters are is not how they got there.

From studying a lot of top performing organizations/teams, my current standpoint is that there is no way to lead from the start unless you come in with proven experience... like let's say your someone like 

Naval Ravikant

or something.

Besides that you just have to find something your willing to execute on and do it well for long enough for it to attract other like-purposed people who you can then collaborate with. 

Also in my experience I think the top performers find it easier to work with others because they are more stingy about who they work with. Beginners are more willing to just say yes and agree to work on projects in a moment of inspiration but not really have the stamina to see things through.

That's a fucking great quote.

"Don't struggle, don't settle. Life's what happens in between." 

Naval Ravikant