First Principles

We are all aware of the nurture vs. nature argument. It is apparent that we are largely the way we are as a result of environmental influence. I believe that most people would say genetics play a smaller part than that of the environment, but I would probably place myself even further on the spectrum towards environment. Even if one day biotechnology advances to the point where we can completely explain all behaviors with an understanding of genetics/epigenetics, we are not there yet, and this would probably be an unfavorable advancement anyways. This would weaken the deterministic force in people's lives and allow for complacency in acceptance of a predisposed stat sheet of genes. Though I believe genetic research is valuable for many things, I would argue that we should focus our individual attention more on shaping the environment around us rather than trying to understand our nature. It sounds cliche, but you get what you get, and there's no use in relishing or sulking in your genetic predispositions.

Though we all generally agree that conditioning plays a big role, we don't often stop to think about the mechanisms we have in place to be conditioned properly. For many people, this is a totally automatic process. We allow our background, upbringing, and environment to shape our lives, and influence our rationality. It takes real work to untangle our beliefs from what we actually believe, instead of what someone else influenced us to believe, either purposefully, or indirectly. The problem is, everyone thinks they have control of their own thoughts, and have thought through their opinions, when in reality this is rarely the case. We see this everyday in people who are overly headstrong about every opinion they have, that was probably just conditioned in them from some external force. I'm not saying being opinionated is a bad thing, I just want to propose what I think is a better way to form those opinions.

There are parts of us that are entirely resistant to change. Some of our foundational traits have been socialized into us from such a young age that the chances of us changing them are insurmountable despite any amount of empiricism or objectivity. Many people fool themselves to believe this is the result of genetics, when it really was just foundational socialization. The truth is that it's impossible to know what's what. Many people would argue that some people are homosexual from birth, but I don't think anyone would argue that somebody might be Catholic, for example, from birth. I know Catholicism has nothing to do with biological traits, but there is certainly a case to be made that our upbringing influences our biology in ways that are known and unknown to us.

If, for whatever reason, four year old you 'decides' (through the illusion of free will) that you like something, or want to be a certain way, you will filter information through that subsequently biased lens. It's so crazy to me to think about the thoughts absent of language, what does an animal, or newborn baby think? They are entirely open to socialization and have no mechanisms to control this. Though we learn language, and think with words, there was a time where we didn't. This is a very hard concept to grasp. With this in mind, what are the chances that a newborn baby, baptized before they knew words, is going to somehow turn out to be a Hindu. Like "no, sorry mom and dad, I know you guys are down with the whole Jesus thing but can you actually read me some Bhagavad Gita before bed tonight?" That's equivalent to saying two elephants may somehow give birth to a Giraffe.

We obviously all have the ability to decide for ourselves what we become, but I am just talking about the most probable outcome on a statistical basis. It's rare for people to become something totally different from the environment they came from. It does happen, but that is likely a result of some other unexplainable socializing force. In High School Musical, the dude's dad wanted him to be a star athlete, which made him want to be a musician even more. This sometimes happens because we secretly want to spite our socialization (dad = uncool, music = cool). But how do we decide what's cool and what's not? Through our first principles.

I believe that many successful people are the way they are because they were lucky enough to stumble upon functional and useful early-foundational-bounding-socialized-traits, or 'first principles'. If we trace back all of our behaviors to fit within a few key desires, we will have a better idea of our identity.

Let's just say the above flowchart could sufficiently organize what makes someone who they are. I'm not putting too much thought into this structure but imagine the following: At the top you would have someone's most central drivers. Below that might be their fundamental beliefs. One step lower might be their resulting characteristics. Which would then influence their behaviors, habits, and daily activities, down to every thought and word spoken. Framing things this way seems overly complicated, but is useful for the following thought experiment. Because I'm an athlete I will use a sports example. Let's say I lose an important match. I may go up one level and say that I shouldn't have eaten something before the match (action). The next level would be saying that I should have followed a more rigid diet (habit). The next would be that I should be a harder worker in general (trait). The next layer would be that I should care more about all the things that can lead to success (value). The next would be that success is something I want to pursue for some reason (purpose) or that success in this trivial context equates to my value as a being (belief). Maybe I would assign a name to this principle (effort).

As you continue going up, the layers become more and more abstract and difficult to define. Additionally, they become more painful to change. But sometimes we must make change at a very deep level. If someone is raised on very strong first principles, they are capable of immense growth. This is like a vast root system allowing a tree to grow tall. Or a strong foundation allowing a skyscraper to be built.

“It is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to.” - Elon Musk

This quote is just so central for what I'm trying to explain here, but in the context of personal development. The principles (branches) allow us to frame the rest of our lives properly and must be focused on the most. Instead of getting bogged down in the minutia of your daily choices, actions, etc. (leaves) try to draw trends and identify things at a more macro level.

You only begin to build understanding when you can rearrange your thoughts or contextualize them. In order to do this you must be able to categorize new things you learn with basic information you already knew. Hopefully this is somehow helpful in directing your energy.

"No tree, it is said, can grow to heaven, unless it’s roots reach down to hell"

"Even when waters are murky the vision is clear"