betweenraindrops wrote: ghostdogg wrote:
Success is the constant reiteration of dependence
Replace success with the word "cloning".
I don't think success ought to be defined that way because we're all dependent upon something or another and yet achievements are limited.
The increasing number in the proletariat class and the heavy pockets of psychiatrists just proves that.
Who defines success anyway these days? The media and money, so in some ways there is an aptness to your statement. I think mankind has reached a point wherein we're just reinventing the wheel sadly like a hamster going at it without purpose just because the wheel is there.
Ooh, can't believe I didn't reply to this one yet...
I realize, now, that the word "dependence" is a bit too vague. What i was trying to say is... The constant iteration of you depending on yourself.
Take money as an example - as superficial as that is - it's not good enough for you to just make a lot of money this weekend. You need to keep making money for an extended period of time before you can be "successful". But for how long?
Next example, how about achieving a certain point in your career? Most people would probably think, once I get this position or promotion, then I am successful... But in reality, in order for you to achieve the position/promotion, you will most likely need to put in amazing work - again, not just for a week. So for how long? Until your performance review? Maybe but if you don't get it the first year, then what? Do you give up or do you keep going, day after day until you've attained the right to demand it?
For me... Both of these examples might be a bit superficial but I'm sure the principle of having to constantly be dependable in whatever sense meets your subjective version of success is exactly the key to it.
I used the word "dependence" because it is not good enough if you just try. You have to win. And remain winning until others (inc yourself) can depend on the fact that you will win. That... Is success.