inaction as embarrassment
Have you ever thought through the question Mason recently put forth in What is the worst that could happen?? Many times, the worst case scenario is not trying. You miss the shots you don't take. If Mason hadn't applied for camp, nor found someone else to go to meet the sponsor's quota, would he have gone? Probably not.
Speaking of: by way of Visa's quote tweet adding nuance to it, I found Kpaxs' topical tweet compelling enough to share:
High-agency people seem to have this weird immunity to embarrassment. Getting rejected? Not embarrassing, that’s just data collection. Looking naive? Not embarrassing, that’s just information asymmetry you’re fixing. Breaking minor social rules? Not embarrassing, most rules are just Schelling points anyway. What would be embarrassing to them is not trying. That’s the thing they can’t live with.
To clarify "most rules are just Schelling points anyway", most rules are default, but flexible focal points based on convention rather than necessity. The common saying of "learn the rules, then break them" seems pretty on-brand for this subject matter.
Subsequent tweets in the thread explain how social rejection evolved from prehistoric death to modern information, where even failed experiments successfully collect data. On that topic, HumbledCarrot asked Grok this question in the replies:
@grok how old was Dyson when he finally got famous with the vacuums and its state of art motor design?
Grok answered:
James Dyson was 46 when he finally hit it big. Born May 2, 1947, he launched the DC01 (Dual Cyclone bagless vacuum) in the UK in 1993 after 5,127 prototypes and years of rejection. It became the UK's top seller despite the high price, thanks to the cyclone tech that kept suction strong. (The "state-of-the-art motor" fame came later with digital motors in the 2000s.)
Several hours after Kpaxs tweeted, Old Whig left a reply:
I learned this my first course in law school. There was a hyper annoying girl constantly asked the most stupid and embarrasing questions. As the course went along they got better, more precise. She got A+. I copied her, cut down my study time by at least 1/3. Never stopped.
His story instantly reminded me of something Ava wrote that she learned in her march month review:
- school has so many social rules that go against my personality and learning. and sometimes compromising with the social rules is helpful, but sometimes screw them. for example i should be allowed to ask questions in class even though everyone hates it when i do that. i have limited my questions to the most relevant ones (the others i ask after class), [...] and everyone groaned, even the ambitious students.
How ambitious are "even the most ambitious students" in Ava's classroom if they are groaning over what could amount to substantial time savings?
However, excess risk aversion isn't just a classroom phenomenon. See Timon's reply:
yeah. most people are optimizing for not looking silly in front of strangers
What examples of that counterproductive optimization could you offload from your brain then share with your world? Could that process be enough to sway you toward embracing embarrassment as an active endeavor?
Most of my audience here comprises fellow bloggers, writers, and creatives. How many works have you not published over unfounded, hypothetical fears of embarrassment or rejection? Do you have tens, hundreds, or even more withering away in your note-taking app or elsewhere? In case you're reading this post without a virtual home and still wonder when you should build one, the second best time is now.
What about in your everyday life? For example: riffing on Timon's observation above, how often do you entertain strangers while you're out and about in public? That question reminded me of Wyer's tweet which explains the included Tiktok video:
Just found this 6 year old Chinese kid on TikTok who goes up to strangers and practices his English talking to them
I would die for this kid
These posts of mine represent another great example of choosing the comfort blanket of commonplace embarrassment over populating novel spaces with my thoughts. Those channels have multiple firsts I could ship. Yet, I'm writing yet another post here atop hundreds? I'm not saying that populating this outlet is even remotely bad. I'm saying that crafting messages through new mediums alongside this established one would better imprint this post's message on my psyche.
Embracing risk, embarrassment, and vulnerability revs up your agency compared to the herd mentality of aiming to not be hated, rejected, or disliked. The former assumes most responses are good responses. While potential downsides grow, your potential upside skyrockets. The latter assumes few responses are good responses. Those extremes collapse and can render you stagnant. Which approach wins you over? Beyond that, which approach will you continue or integrate?