Here are Eleven Things You Didn't Learn in School

Yeah, thats a lot better than chicks digging guys with intelligence and kindness.

[Bosolai]

I've seen this article before, and it was a long while ago. I was a very highly impressionable freshman in HS about 3.5 years ago when I saw it (yes, I'm young enough to be using 1/2 years as significant), and I'll admit I'm still very impressionable as a graduate now. But the way I took this article was basically "People lie cheat and steal, so deal with it. If you work hard enough and pay attention, you'll get your just reward. Don't expect anything to just be handed to you, though."

Now, I agree with the tone sucking. It stereotypes a LOT. But throughout high school, I've done a lot of very, very hard work. But about 5 months ago, I've been offered jobs paying up to 60k a year with benefits, and I'm gonna begin employment at the start of June now that school is out. So sure, I'm not a VP, but I've got a 60k a year job and a cell phone I can use in my car, all right out of high school. So that part in the article is just BS and really makes people have less expectations.

This article does have some good points, but it completely ignores and even denies others. The "work for what you want, cause you won't get it for free" thing is important. But when I read it, it implies that you shouldn't ever expect anything, only be grateful you've got it cause the great DM hates you and you somehow rolled a 20 against his loaded dice. Now I worked my ass off in high school, and I sure as hell expect my due rewards. I get to spend a mere 40 hours a week doing a job that not only do I find easy, I LOVE doing, as well as get to spend plenty of time with my girlfriend, get to practice an instrument, get to go to college for full ride for 4 years and then another 4, AND get to know that I'll be financially secure for the rest of my life as long as I don't do something stupid. The article is right on the money when it says that working hard will make you a winner, but I really don't like how it stereotypes younger people, generally saying that all young'ns are rediculously spoiled and have no respect whatsoever for their elders. Sorry to say it, but anyone without that respect has probably already figured this out first hand, and anyone that spoiled won't need a job. Inheritance alone will cover retirement at the age of 3 for them.

[Illuminatus]

Rule 14 is the only inexorably true one I've seen yet.

So you think you are immortal (rule 13)?

[Illuminatus]

Originally Posted by WanderingWombat

So you think you are immortal (rule 13)?

First, yes.

Second, rule 13 isn't actually about being immortal. It's about lifestyle. And like every rule except 14, it has some good points, but it's not a maxim to live by or anything.

[Krylo]

Originally Posted by WanderingWombat

Yeah, thats a lot better than chicks digging guys with intelligence and kindness.

You're the one who loved these rules, so:

Life is not fair- get used to it.

Confidence is derived from self-esteem, and confidence is also the one unilaterally attractive thing. Note: False confidence is not, as that it comes off as arrogance, but if you're honestly confident in your ability to do that job, get that girl, or do anything else, people will react. The person interviewing you will be infinitely more likely to give you that job. The girl you're talking to will be infinitely more likely to actually exchange numbers with you.

Why? Because you happen to have, in DZ's words, 'warm fuzzies' about your abilities as a human being.

Originally Posted by DarthZeth

what? "life isn't fair" MEANS "don’t do anything"?

I agree with your sentiment. Things aren't HANDED to you, you have to go out and EARN the things you want to make it "fair".

oddly, that’s EXACTLY what I think he is saying. So why are you ripping on him?

Because that's not what he's saying. He's saying "Get used to it". He's not saying, "Do something to change it."

There's a world of difference between the connotations behind "Get used to it" and any other form of wording.

In writing, the literal meaning of each word is not as important as the connotations carried by them, and no professional writer worth shit would make the mistake of saying that unless they meant "Shut up and take it, you pansy."

...And if this guy sucks at what he does, why are we listening to him for advice on how to succeed in life?

Self-esteem with out accomplishment is GREAT. But why does the world care about your own warm fuzzy feelings?

See above. Or, look at my other posts after I quoted that very thing.

It says you only get what you earn.

although, I'd say Rule 3 is mostly wrong. I was a Vice President with a car phone (well, a cell phone that I frequently use in the car). Then again, there were only two people in that company ¬_¬. But the, as you say, "implication" is still; that you don't get GIVEN shit. you earn it.

Insert whatever particular goal you want in there.

No, the literal translation is that you earn things. It's implied that getting x amount of money is uber important, when it's not.

I pretty much disagree with this rule, too. All my bosses have been decent (I’ve worked with some jackass coworkers, though), and I think the tenured teachers are the worse teachers anyway.

granted, I still agree with what he implied: that students, who's only job is to do homework and go to school, have nothing to bitch about. Even in college my professors expect 3 to 4 hours of work out of me each week. My bosses expected 40, minimum. Usually 48.

Really? Because when I was in school I was expected to be there about 35 to 40 hours a week + I had homework every day + studying + whatever other stupid things teachers felt like having me do. And I was told every day that my entire future hinged upon doing well. That was stressful and, back when I actually did everything, that was at least 48 hours of work a week. More if you take extra curriculars, which you need on college applications if you want to go to a good one.

I now have a job in which I work 40 hours a week, I never bring any of it home, and you know what? It's a hell of a lot less stressful because if I screw up I lose a nickle on my next raise, maybe if I REALLY screw up I get written up, and if that happens three times I get fired. But even if I get fired, it's not my whole future. It's just one job... and more likely it's just 5 cents an hour that I can make up on my next review if I work hard.

That’s funny, cuz my grandparents and great grandparents called working in a garnet mine, working in what would today be called sweatshops, and cleaning floors "opportunity".

And yes, its NOT worth being some place you hate. That place for my family was a post WWI Germany. Digging around in a dark pit to find semi-precious stones for other people sucked, too. And if you had offered my great grandparents a job at a Burger Joint, you can bet they'd have taken it.

bitching about how much your burger joint job sucks IS pretty near the height of conceit. YOU have the right to have an easier, better paying job then a BK job, but my grand parents didn't?

Well, you know what, your grandparents don't get the right to bitch either, because my great great great great grandparents were tortured for witch craft until they were forced to admit to worshipping satan, under the influence of hallucinogenic drugs, and their friends were burnt at the stake. Oh, and my great great great great great great great great great grandparents were sold into white slavery. (note, I have no idea if I actually am related to someone like that, but it's probable)

Guess what--The past of your family, or mine, or Bill's down the street don't reflect on this discussion at all. If I don't like flipping burgers, I'll quit. Just because your grandparents didn't have that option doesn't mean that I should refuse to exercise that option when I have it, or that I lose the right to complain if I don't like it.

fuck no it wasn't. We still own the property that my great grandparents bought after moving form Germany. This was AFTER they got established and when they were doing BETTER off then when they first got here. If you ever are in the Pennsylvania area and we haven't sold the property yet, I’ll give you a short tour. You can take a look around and tell me that what they stove for was "just money", and not to better their lives.

Shit, the Mexicans who work at the local burger joint in my town aren't there for "just money". They are there to make their family's lives better, too.

"just money" my ass

You can buy things with money. You can better people's lives with money. But you don't NEED an acre of land. You don't NEED a digital HD tv. You don't NEED any of this shit. And you know what? You can survive getting just what you need right out of highschool making a couple dollars over minimum wage with a room mate. It's not a great life, but it's not a 'wrong' life.

It's his list. His advice is to not blame your parents for your mistakes.

are you saying he is wrong? should you blame your parents for your mistakes? Because it seems to me that he is right. You shouldn't blame your parents (or anyone else, for that matter) for your mistakes.

I'm saying his advice on this list makes no sense. Where'd it come from? Why were parents included at all? Who the hell blames their parents for everything? Seriously. It's the stupidest thing I've ever seen written, and the rule would make about 100x more sense if he just dropped the parents part. It'd still be incredibly assholish, but it'd at least make sense.

I must have missed that. unless it was when you said "Love, family, friends, and your own happiness are all FAR more important than making loads of money, or any money at all, really."

Actually, it's where I quoted that either earlier in that post or in an earlier post.

ok. Tell that to the parents who changed your diapers, fed you, took you to the doctor, housed you, and yeah, probably cleaned your cloths, too.

And who were able to do it for half a year on nothing but welfare payments. You don't need to make a lot of money to provide for a family. More than you're going to get straight out of highschool, in most cases, sure, but you don't need a LOT.

The reason why he says "They got [boring] from paying your bills..." is BECAUSE their family was more important to them then money. Because having children is probably the most expensive thing you will EVER do. Even if you don't pay for their college education. My father didn't commute to work every day so that he could drive a Porche. He worked his tail off to support his family. That meant working long hours. That meant dealing with stupid bosses. And yes, that meant working at a place he hated.

And what kind of amenities did you have as a child? Were you just barely scraping by, or did you have stuff like computers, video games, a good tv, etc?

And, would your father have been more happy working that job he hated and being able to afford nice things or would he have been more happy with more time off and just barely scraping by financially, but spending more time with his family?

What works for him isn't what works for everyone. His 'win' condition is not necessarily my 'win' condition. His idea of 'supporting' a family may go beyond my own.

Some people are happier WITHOUT lots of gizmos, just so long as they have time away from work to do whatever, or so long as they're working someplace they like.

Maybe he was just barely scraping by, but then, maybe he shouldn't have started a family if he wasn't prepared for it.

If we're going to argue personal responsibility involved with supporting a family, which is not AT ALL what this article was about (as it was targetted at people who almost definately don't have families and shouldn't for a few years yet), let's argue how responsible it is to start one before you can provide for them to your idea of comfort.

[Krylo]

This isn't about WEALTH. This isn't about living high on the hog. This isn't about decadence.
This is about making sure medical bills are paid. This is about making sure your kids get braces. This is about affording to live in a safe neighborhood. This about going to decent schools.

not greed. not "just money".

This is about affording your kids gamestation II. This is about living in a nice house. This is about having a computer. This is about having two or three tvs.

Like it or not, western civilization hasn't been about having what you need to survive for the past couple generations. The reason cost of living seems so high isn't because it IS, but because people are factoring in things that they do not need to live.

And then you get to a point where you can either work harder to get those things or you can decide that not working as hard works better for you.

While you were focusing on "implications" the point flew over your head. He isn't setting standards for you. You are imagining his standards. He is telling you that sometimes YOU WILL FAIL AT WHAT YOU TRY. Or don't try, as it most likely is with failing grades in school.

Writing is very very very rarely just about the top coat. The literal meanings.

It's about tone. It's about implied messages. It's about saying things without actually saying them.

Any course on speech or persuasive writing will explain all of these things far better than I can.

Suffice to say that I'm not imagining what this writer meant. He chose this tone. He had time to look it over and rewrite things. He had time to make it say what you think he did more concisely and more clearly. He didn't. He chose the words, order, and tone that he chose because they conveyed the meaning he wanted. He calculated the connotations. He arranged them and edited them and rearranged them because that's what writers do before they publish something.

He said what he wanted to say, and it's not ALL in the literal meaning of every word. It's in the space between them.

first of all, $40,000 is high paying? where do you live?

I make $20,000 or less a year. $40,000 would be more than enough for me to live perfectly comfortable. I suppose if you have a family it's not a shit load, but it's enough.

and second of all, neither managers at "burger flipping" operations, nor managers at "high paying" operations care about you "finding yourself".

No they don't, but I don't care if they care. If I feel that I need to find myself and that my job is in the way of that, I'll cut ties with it. If I have people I'm supporting, that's a different story, but, you know, this wasn't directed at people with families. This was directed at people who aren't even supporting themselves yet.

also, you've never read about Maslow's hierarchy of needs, have you? Physiological and safety needs rank are generally more immediate then social and "love" needs. You can't "find yourself" if you can't even feed yourself.

This is true, but you can feed yourself without a steady job. There are homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and part time jobs you can take while travelling. You can even save up some money, quit a job, and live for a few months to a few years without working. I know plenty of people who have done that.

Friends are plenty important. But, uh, unless your parents are supporting you, you need a job. You CAN'T just sit around in a coffee shop all day shooting the shit like its a SitCom.

"Life isn't a SitCom." Man, this guy is such a radical, isn't he?!

Again, literal to implied.

The literal meaning of this rule is one thing that I agree with, but he brings up work yet again.

It's called cohesion in writing. All your points should be, in some way, connected. If over half of his points are obviously connected to working and jobs it's safe to assume that any which can be applied to that condition are actually about working and jobs.

Sets the tone.

besides, Friends sucked.

Like a two dollar whore.

Yeah, that American school children DON'T HAVE TO WORK. They are almost completely supported by OTHER PEOPLE'S WORK. The "overall tone" is that when you are living at home on someone else’s dime, you have no right to complain about "fairness", because the world has been pretty goddamn good to you.

He didn't say that even once. Every single point on this was about life AFTER you're done being supported. It was about survival in the real world, and while that may have been an underlying point, it is hidden behind all the bullshit in every point after that.

I mean, if you want to say “material things aren’t important” that’s great. But you can’t say that while other people are putting a roof over your head and food on your table and you’re playing Halo 2 on your new Xbox.

Can I say it when I'm paying rent, buy my own food, and have bought my own video games that I play?

If material things are not important, throw away your shit.

That would work if I ever said they were unimportant, period. However, I said they were unimportant in comparison to other parts of your life. Material possessions make life easier and more fun, but you sure as hell shouldn't judge your life's victory on them.

If you WANT your material things (which I personally think is perfectly fine), then expect to EARN your material things. Don’t expect mommy and daddy to GIVE them to you.

Again, I buy a lot of my own shit, except for gifts on christmas and my birthday. I know you have to earn them, and so does anyone with half a brain. If that's the point of this person's writing... if there's NOTHING else implied then my only complaint is that he's a goddamn idiot who couldn't figure this out on his own and thinks everyone else in the world is also a goddamn idiot and he's serving some amazing purpose by telling them.

And don’t throw a hissy fit if you don’t get the toy you want for Christmas, because there are people all over the world who are Dieing to live your life.

Complain about life “not being fair” when you’re swimming through shark infested waters to get to a free country, and complain about the ”unimportance of material things” when you live in a mud hunt in Ethiopia and you haven’t eaten in three days. Or when you’re digging rocks out of a garnet mine.

Originally Posted by Krylo

Well, you know what, your grandparents don't get the right to bitch either, because my great great great great grandparents were tortured for witch craft until they were forced to admit to worshipping satan, under the influence of hallucinogenic drugs, and their friends were burnt at the stake. Oh, and my great great great great great great great great great grandparents were sold into white slavery. (note, I have no idea if I actually am related to someone like that, but it's probable)

Guess what--The past of your family, or mine, or Bill's down the street don't reflect on this discussion at all. If I don't like flipping burgers, I'll quit. Just because your grandparents didn't have that option doesn't mean that I should refuse to exercise that option when I have it, or that I lose the right to complain if I don't like it.

Edit:

Originally Posted by Dynamite220

You read way way too much into this one. Yes, there are winners and losers. Weather he's winning or not is for the individual to decide in his own uniuqe circumstances.

So, if the indivdual decides if he's the winner or loser, then there IS no clear winner or loser in the real world.

If I don't consider losing my job as losing, I'm not a loser. If I don't consider being a bum as losing, I'm not a loser.

But then, how is that different from school?

It's all about weighing parts of your life in importance. If one person thinks straight As are more important than social interaction, they're going to consider themselves a winner for getting straight As and they're going to consider someone who's barely scraping by a loser. However, if someone believes that keeping up friendships is more important than grades, they're going to consider themselves a winner, and Mr. 4.0 a loser.

The same applies to the real world.

There are no losers.

Either he's implying a set victory condition, or he makes no sense.

[Lucas]

Really? Because when I was in school I was expected to be there about 35 to 40 hours a week + I had homework every day + studying + whatever other stupid things teachers felt like having me do. And I was told every day that my entire future hinged upon doing well. That was stressful and, back when I actually did everything, that was at least 48 hours of work a week. More if you take extra curriculars, which you need on college applications if you want to go to a good one.

I now have a job in which I work 40 hours a week, I never bring any of it home, and you know what? It's a hell of a lot less stressful because if I screw up I lose a nickle on my next raise, maybe if I REALLY screw up I get written up, and if that happens three times I get fired. But even if I get fired, it's not my whole future. It's just one job... and more likely it's just 5 cents an hour that I can make up on my next review if I work hard.

The difference between having an R score of 30 and an R score of 36 is around 8% in terms of overall placement. Basically, if you're number 9 instead of number 5, you fail to get into pre-med straight out of CEGEP in Quebec. The stress this puts on people is incredible. My friend put in around 20 hours of work per week to get money for tuition, then did 15 hours of volunteering at the teaching hospital which is a block away from the school where we went. To add to that, he was in the health science program, so he had 3 more hours of inclass time per week compared with a commerce student. take ALL of that, and add it to the fact that he did around 20 to 25 hours of studying per test or exam, and did 10 hours a week of homework.

Krylo is right on the money: school is NOT easy if you're trying to do well.

You can buy things with money. You can better people's lives with money. But you don't NEED an acre of land. You don't NEED a digital HD tv. You don't NEED any of this shit. And you know what? You can survive getting just what you need right out of highschool making a couple dollars over minimum wage with a room mate. It's not a great life, but it's not a 'wrong' life.

i wouldn't even stop there. say you're living with this roomate and you're doin' the minimum wage thing. Why isn't that a great life? K, you don't have the plasma, or the "insane sick pwnz ricer" edition of your civic, fair enough. On the other hand, with less to worry about at work, aren't you more likely to go have a picnic on sundays at the park? what about taking a few months off to go tree planting in another country?

Why is it that the connection between material wealth and happiness is so prevalent here?

The practical example is that I can be perfectly happy with my gameboy, while you can have a DS and never be satisfied with the 700 new games you buy. Meanwhile, my mario picross is getting me plenty of happiness.

If you say this is about survival, about how we need wealth to live awesome lives.. you're dead wrong. you can work minimum wage and produce more wealth in your life than an advertising executive that gets payed thousands more than you per week. You can be a farmer, live happily and never touch any money apart from the amount you need to keep your tractors working, and your silos repaired.

Don't see anything about those life rules applying to that, or to any life choices which don't involve money and being a corporate worker. Shame, really.

To sum up:

"Life sucks. Shut up and get to work."

[Lockeownzj00]

Rule No. 12: Smoking does not make you look cool. It makes you look moronic. Next time you're out cruising, watch an 11-year-old with a butt in his mouth. That's what you look like to anyone over 20. Ditto for "expressing yourself" with purple hair and/or pierced body parts.

Rule No. 13: You are not immortal. (See Rule No. 12.) If you are under the impression that living fast, dying young and leaving a beautiful corpse is romantic, you obviously haven't seen one of your peers at room temperature lately.

Rule No. 14: Enjoy this while you can. Sure parents are a pain, school's a bother, and life is depressing. But someday you'll realize how wonderful it was to be a kid. Maybe you should start now. You're welcome.

Oooh, condescending anti-drug anti-expression rules. Let's get to it shall we?

Rule No. 12: Smoking does not make you look cool. It makes you look moronic. Next time you're out cruising, watch an 11-year-old with a butt in his mouth. That's what you look like to anyone over 20. Ditto for "expressing yourself" with purple hair and/or pierced body parts.

Actually, this is not true at all. Pscyhologically, if one were to analyze it, there is a huge aesthetic appeal to smoking--the cigarette itself, the lighting of the cigarette, the inhalation. People think it's a pointless endeavor. People also think that alcohol and coffee aren't drugs. Conclusion: People are misguided. Cigarettes use tobacco. it is a drug. It is a relaxant--a downer. It DOES do something. Try smoking a cigarette if you want. Corporate profits and peer pressure aside, there is nothing inherently wrong with smoking. Sure, you're messing with your body, but that makes me think of the other rule:

Rule No. 13: You are not immortal. (See Rule No. 12.) If you are under the impression that living fast, dying young and leaving a beautiful corpse is romantic, you obviously haven't seen one of your peers at room temperature lately.

Welcome to The Wonderful World of Bitter Naivette! It's not about being romantic--it's about being hedonistic. Hedonism is a valid philosophy on life, and if those aroudn you wish to bore themselves to tears, and wish to live monotonous, "healthy" lives, that shouldn't affect you.

It's so funny, we treat things like drugs and smoking (which is a drug but people want that clarification to make them feel better) as if they are different; "well my life may be boring but at least I'm healthy." Does that really matter? Isn't it as much a factor as anything else? Don't I have the right to put what I want in my own body (don't bring up the law. Although it needs to change as a human being, morally, this does not impact me)? Others treat it like a 'problem,' and to deny it is only to prove that you have the problem. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, eh? It's a fucking witch hunt. If my problem is smoking or drugs, your problem is no social life. Or something else--depression? Impotence? Bad Acting? It's a part of our society like any other.

And the point is--if you are dead, you have no conscience, you do not think, therefore there's nothing for you to "look back on." I coudl die at any moment and it would affect many peoples lives, except mine--I wouldn't even be able to regret it because I'd be dead. Who wrote this? What a fucking contumely--yes, your decrepit 80 years of age with your forty meds a day and machines hooked up to every oriface is so much better than my young existence. The old are bitter.

Rule No. 14: Enjoy this while you can. Sure parents are a pain, school's a bother, and life is depressing. But someday you'll realize how wonderful it was to be a kid. Maybe you should start now. You're welcome.

Yeah! It's the, "it can't be that bad" argument. Of course! First, they throw the 'maturity' argument out. "One day, you'll realise as you get older that your life of being treated patronizingly, having no rights, never fulfilling enough, is much better than your even worse situation as an adult." Of course, people will quote wonderful childhoods. These are the childhoods where you either voluntarily or involuntarily did everything "right." Anyone who deviates is fucked. Because our society tries to place objective, utopian ideals on us, when life is truly subjective. People make sentimental tv shows and write pompous essays about lollipops and puppies and target the upper-middle class lifestyle. Try telling this fucking list to the poor population. See how they take it. Yeah, just get a job, you might as well tell them.

Sage Francis - Slow Down Gandhi

"Making you think you're crazy is a billion dollar industry.
If they could sell sanity in a bottle they'd be charging for compressed air,
and marketing healthcare.
They demonize welfare.
Middle class eliminated, rich get richer
till the poor get educated."