The Good-Enough Life

I was awed at this piece--The Good Enough Life, both the writing and the message.

It's a particularly useful counterpoint in this time of ours where anything less than a great result--a win--is considered a miserable loss by a miserable loser. I have never personally achieved greatness at anything, and long ago came peacefully to terms with that. It has freed me up to pursue good-enoughness in a lot of different and interesting endeavors that I'd likely not have pursued had I put in the time and effort to become great at anything. Recall that it supposedly takes 10,000 hours of practice to become an expert at something--though this theory is controversial. People point out that you can put in 10,000 hours of effort trying to become a great guitarist and still suck. Which makes me feel better about not practicing more.

But I get the gist--becoming great takes a bunch of work and time, and most people don't or can't put in that time. They end up, if they are lucky, being good enough. And there's no shame in being good enough. Life is such a bizarre gaggle of circumstances, talent, and effort, but, sadly, dumb luck is perhaps the single most outcome- determinative factor. I always wonder--did a guitarist who would have outplayed Jimi Hendrix perish on a battlefield in Vietnam, another in a car crash in Nebraska, another on a mean street in Oakland?

[tabs]

Hendrix is not the guitarist you should have picked...to make your point. Chas Chandler said of Hendrix that you would be good to if you sat on the toilette practicing...which meant he always was playing the guitar.

The 10000 hour rule means that neural changes have taken place in the brain. As an apprentice becomes a master craftsman. To put that much time in you have to have a passion and or affinity for the endeavor. It has meaning for you.

[wdfifteen]

We need to ask the question, “good enough for what?” How do we measure “enough?”

For me, “enough” is a measure I struggle with constantly. I’m always deciding when to accept a project or other endeavor to be “good enough” for me to be satisfied with it.

[pwd72s]

Originally Posted by tabs

Hendrix is not the guitarist you should have picked...to make your point. Chas Chandler said of Hendrix that you would be good to if you sat on the toilette practicing...which meant he always was playing the guitar.

The 10000 hour rule means that neural changes have taken place in the brain. As an apprentice becomes a master craftsman. To put that much time in you have to have a passion and or affinity for the endeavor. It has meaning for you.

Bingo! Has to have meaning enough to be dedicated to that one thing alone to reach the top. Fine for those who have the desire combined with a beginning talent for whatever it is...but even then, only one makes the absolute top.

If it's money, only one can be the richest of all...in sports, let the debate begin because many are good at any game you care to mention. In music, it's all a judgment call, depending on who is judging.

In pocket Billiards, Shane Van Boening of South Dakota is the best in the world according to a computerized ranking system known as the Fargo ratings. However, there are many younger and very talented pool dogs hungrily nipping at his heels.
He literally got tuned into the game from his high chair...hearing impared, he was fascinated watching the balls as his mother practiced on her home table. Quite a story.

I'm sure there are similar stories in all human activity.

Not many are dedicated enough to make the top...nor should we be. In pool, I'm quite content to be a recreational banger.

[KFC911]

My name ain't Peter....and I have my own principles...so there!

Methinks this board is full of achievers....those seeking perfection....ain't wasting their time here though It's an obsession imo...

Mebbe they're in PARF

Originally Posted by tabs

Hendrix is not the guitarist you should have picked...to make your point. Chas Chandler said of Hendrix that you would be good to if you sat on the toilette practicing...which meant he always was playing the guitar.

The 10000 hour rule means that neural changes have taken place in the brain. As an apprentice becomes a master craftsman. To put that much time in you have to have a passion and or affinity for the endeavor. It has meaning for you.

I agree, tabs. I picked Hendrix for his position at the very pinnacle of the guitar player layer heap. His dedication of time to that effort to build those neural pathways meant no time left to become good enough at other stuff. Plus, there was a little bit of madness thrown in.

Speaking of guitars, spent an enjoyable morning at the Phoenix Musical Instrument Museum today before jetting home. They have an electric guitar exhibit going on now that is not to be missed. Actual guitars played by Keith and Ronnie, a very early Les Paul gold top prototype, one of Bo Diddley's crazy homemade custom guitars, SRV's fur lined stage boots, lots of cool video--and that was just the guitar exhibit. They have a whole huge building full of other cool stuff. I could have spent a week there.

[sc_rufctr]

Hendrix... A CIA plant?

[ckelly78z]

My life is too busy to achieve perfection, and usually butt heads with those that do. You would not believe the level of perfection that our Japenese parent company demands from the American engineering side...what a monumental waste of time, effort, and resouces, when the customer standards aren't nearly as strict.

I live on a farm in the countryside, and drive older used cars, so nothing is ever perfect for very long, I will leave that for the high rise metropolitan, condo people with no pets that never soil their hands.

I would actually like to take up guitar, but probably not until I retire.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Nothing groundbreaking but it’s a good sentiment, and as usual the truth is somewhere in the middle. Too far one direction and you have socialism where there is no motivation to be anything beyond mediocre. Too far the other way you have obsessed egomaniacs so obsessed with their own achievement that they typically destroy other aspects of their lives. It does sadden me though, the concept of denying your own potential to be great. Without that internal drive we would not have had amazing people like Hendrix and Einstein. For me personally I think it’s more about realizing my own potential to be great while balancing with other aspects of my life, then being content with the end result. The challenge with pushing to be great is that you can always still be “better”, and that pursuit becomes a black hole of sorts.

[flatbutt]

Sometimes good enough is just that. Learning to live with it isn't always easy. It's a lesson that took me a long time to learn. It doesn't mean being lazy or settling for "less". It is a way of accepting reality.

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by wdfifteen

We need to ask the question, “good enough for what?” How do we measure “enough?”

For me, “enough” is a measure I struggle with constantly. I’m always deciding when to accept a project or other endeavor to be “good enough” for me to be satisfied with it.

And then there's the judgement side. I know a sihtload of people that are constantly looking for praise. I have fallen into that trap myself more often than not. However, I have seen why that isn't the way to judge one's accomplishments.

By most definitions I am a master carpenter. I can do some nice work but mistakes are a fact. They can be small and not noticeable or something gone wrong could ruin the job. The work is 95% paid for by customers so getting paid pretty much constitutes acceptance.

Now we enter the phase of what the other person knows. I have often wondered about the qualifications of experts and critics although I don't refute they exist.

I bring all this down to the saying, "Who's to say?"

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by Zeke

And then there's the judgement side. I know a sihtload of people that are constantly looking for praise. I have fallen into that trap myself more often than not. However, I have seen why that isn't the way to judge one's accomplishments.
(snip)

I bring all this down to the saying, "Who's to say?"

Who's to say. Good question. I work as if I have an expert looking over my shoulder. It's not my choice, I'm just wired that way. When I'm working I think about the crap work I've seen and how I feel about it, as in this post.

Oh Lord, what have I done?

I don't ever want anyone, years from now, looking at my work and saying, "What dumbass did this?"

I guess "good enough" means never having to make an excuse.

[ckissick]

My wife is a perfectionist in everything she does, and that's usually not a good thing. It causes her to be late for everything, get stressed out over everything, and generally not enjoy life as much as she should.

I've always called myself a good-enoughist. In college if I figured I knew enough to get a B or C, I'd put down the books and head down to the beach. Of course, there were many great temptations at the beaches at UC Santa Barbara. There are some things I am a perfectionist about, though: restoring a car, acting in a play, and writing a novel. All three are things that potentially large numbers of strangers will witness. Perhaps I'm only a perfectionist when there's a possibility of some level of public embarrassment.


BTW, I've played guitar for 40 years and no amount of practice will get me anywhere near Jimi, or any other famous guitarist, for that matter. I'm good, but certainly not great.

[McLovin]

I guess the author is a "do as I say, not as I do" kind of person.

I hardly think that "dumb luck" has been the most outcome-determinative factor in his life so far. Or that very little has been "good enough" for him. It's a good theory for the masses, though.

Absolutely incredible desire for, and pursuit of, greatness by that fellow.

http://www.avramalpert.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/alpert_CV.pdf

[sc_rufctr]

Are you happy? = Yes, then you have a good life.

Good-enough implies that your settled. I think we all do in some ways.

[RANDY P]

As far as I'm concerned 'good enough' means I only have to be liable for myself. My goal in life is to be beholden to no one.

The only things I should have to do, is to be brown and to die. To hell with everyone else. As long as I can do as I please, it's good.

rjp

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by RANDY P

As far as I'm concerned 'good enough' means I only have to be liable for myself. My goal in life is to be beholden to no one.

The only things I should have to do, is to be brown and to die. To hell with everyone else. As long as I can do as I please, it's good.

rjp

I was nodding my head in total agreement reading along....then awe schit....I can't do that either worth a damn....total fail

I truly am binary...but it seems to stay on a lot....just because...

I always made "a" s in school....but with minimal effort...A- wuz gud enuff....I had a good time two...

Originally Posted by Zeke

And then there's the judgement side. I know a sihtload of people that are constantly looking for praise. I have fallen into that trap myself more often than not. However, I have seen why that isn't the way to judge one's accomplishments.

By most definitions I am a master carpenter. I can do some nice work but mistakes are a fact. They can be small and not noticeable or something gone wrong could ruin the job. The work is 95% paid for by customers so getting paid pretty much constitutes acceptance.

Now we enter the phase of what the other person knows. I have often wondered about the qualifications of experts and critics although I don't refute they exist.

I bring all this down to the saying, "Who's to say?"

I definitely relate to this, Zeke. About 25 years ago I installed a wood floor in my house. It was red oak, and had a windowpane pattern around the perimeter, set off by a 3/4" inlaid walnut strip around the perimeter (a challenging build for a rank beginner). It turned out very nice, but naturally had flaws, as wooden things built by amateurs tend to.
By the end, unfortunately, all I could see was the flaws. I'd walk in the front door and my eyes would fly to the spots that were less than perfect. Kinda ruined the experience for me, initially.

By the time we moved out many years later, I didn't even see the flaws. Fast forward, I went back to the house last year, and couldn't even remember where the flaws were. All I saw was a very nice wood floor that the new owners really loved. It was definitely "good enough."

Originally Posted by McLovin

I guess the author is a "do as I say, not as I do" kind of person.

I hardly think that "dumb luck" has been the most outcome-determinative factor in his life so far. Or that very little has been "good enough" for him. It's a good theory for the masses, though.

Absolutely incredible desire for, and pursuit of, greatness by that fellow.

http://www.avramalpert.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/alpert_CV.pdf

Impressive resume, and certainly denotes a life of achievement. But I contend that dumb luck still had a lot to do with it. He was born smart, white, male, and American, and had the means to get a good education. That's a big leg up on a lot of folks.

But your point is valid: all that would still have gotten him nothing had he not put in the effort.

[KFC911]

^^^ Only took me 7-8 years to get my itty-bitty house floor done....on a diagonal....just because...I pay attention to detail....nobody will ever know but me. Craftsman are like Milt....fast too....but I try....sometimes...

Sports taught me to settle for average ....and I really tried...