zlacker

While moving from Pittsburgh to Paris to Hong Kong to Singapore to Berlin to Cape Town is more likely a waste of energy again and risks burning you (not mentioning the planet) out. It's a lot easier to turn the adventure-o-meter up than to turn it down.

>>3np+(OP)
I suspect you're right that the first time is an adventure and the fifth time is a chore.

After your first or second big move you might need to change careers or something instead.

>>3np+(OP)
Agreed. This brand of self-aggrandizing “I did it my way” advice adverts always exemplify a special brand of narcissism; the speaker is unaware that they aren’t the center of their own life. The truth is that “blowing up your life” isn’t usually good or laudable: if you regularly find yourself in situations where you think it’s best to hard reset you’re probably very confused about what you want and need and, ironically, would probably benefit more from figuring out how to renegotiate an undesirable situation than eternally storming between grand schemes.

>>zerbin+L6
"the speaker is unaware that they aren’t the center of their own life"

What does this even mean? Of course you are the center of your own life. That's the human experience.

>>superh+rs
Some would argue the human experience is inherently social, with other humans and the lack of stable community (putting down roots amongst friends, family and a hyperlocal community) isn't realizing said experience to the fullest. To each their own though.

>>zerbin+L6
But also to the contrary this is the exact line of thinking that causes the large majority of people to sleep walk through life, as the author says. It is a hard truth of life that the large majority of people (80+% I would say) do not take any real risks in their entire long life.

You can obviously over-do it, and yes it probably feels good to follow the herd and stay in the "okay" relationship and the "okay" job with the same old things because you feel like that's what everyone does. But... there is much more outside that world. The walls you think are there are in fact not there at all. There is room for risk within reason in life.

>>engine+ZJ
So what? Why take risks? Merely to say “look I took a risk and it paid off”? I get that risk-taking can result in wealth, fame, etc. but (and I think this is where opinions like OP’s break down for a lot of people) a lot of people struggle to get through the “sleepwalking” life - going to college, finding an apartment, getting your first car, etc. can be huge risks if you lack some generational wealth to back you up in case things go sideways. I mean, hell, most Americans have like $500 in their bank account. Going to the grocery store is a life-or-death (or eternal medically induced poverty) is right around the corner.

And I guess that leads me to what I really turn my nose up at OP’s line of reasoning. Sure, he can move to Thailand and become whatever kind of journo-grifter. I have a wife and kids! I can’t/don’t want to blow it up just to say “I took a risk” and leave them destitute. Which maybe that’s all to say there’s a big difference between gambling with someone else’s money and gambling with your own.

>>superh+rs
I disagree, and I want to try to say this in the least cringey and New Age-y way possible, bear with me. Your limited sensory experience indicates you are the “center of your life” - that you are some spirit in your head, inhabiting a body that bumps into other bodies, etc. When you grow up you gain an awareness of other people having this experience alongside you. Sometimes it’s possible to reorient your understanding of this experience away from “I” and towards “we” and to broaden the scope of what “your” life is about. This would mean things like considering your family or community the “center of your life” which I think is considerably better happiness wise than the naive egoism that we take as the (Very American) default setting for life.

>>engine+ZJ
"Taking a risk" by definition means things may improve for you, but they can also get worse. Most people aren't in that great of a position in the first place, they don't want to fall even lower. Esp. since the lows are really low and the highs aren't really as high, and have a diminishing returns quality to them. As Jordan Peterson put it "you can only be so happy, but you can be 100% dead".