"I learned to do [x] because I had to/had no choice" ...

Post Reply New Topic

I am sometimes bothered by these kinds of statements, because they can be used to suggest that motivation/necessity is what decides whether or not you will be able to do [x].

Necessity and desperation are powerful motivators, but they are not the only things that determine whether or not you can do something. We all have different skills and abilities, different limitations. There are people in the world whose only hope is to learn to do [x] and they can't learn to do it.

It can be just as frustrating/hurtful/alienating to have people fail to acknowledge/understand your experience when you aren't able to do [x] as it can be to have people fail to acknowledge/understand your experience when you are able to do [x].

I understand that when people say, "I had to/had no choice" it's true -- and whenever I read that statement I associate it with sheer desperation and extreme difficulty. I don't mean to minimize anybody's struggles, achievements or other experiences.

I have a problem with the reverse, where people assume that just because you couldn't do something, you didn't really need to or want to enough.

Yes, me, too.

I meant that I am sometimes bothered by people saying, "I learned to do [x] because I had to" -- because that phrase can suggest that to succeed at [x], all anybody needs is a reason to try hard enough (need or want).

I've learned that often enough, people who say that actually had help of some sort...because if they could have done it on their own they would've done it before they "had no choice".

I dunno. I'm pretty much an Autodidact in most cases. Books, tutorials, research....or is that included in help?

I mean, nobody can really teach themselves everything. You may happen upon a solution out of happenstance, but for the most part, knowledge comes from somewhere.

But "they" rarely are.

Oh....ok....But I was really trying to decipher where that line could be drawn.

And, I'm an autodidact because I can't stand to be around people when I am learning. I know that I should be out there taking classes and probably short cutting a lot of things that take forever through trial and error.

But, I do get your meaning....now....duhhhhhhhhhh

Not the sharpest wood shaving in the knife drawer sometimes.....

I think most people who say this are saying it from their individual perspective, not implying something negative about others. I think it is fine that they say it, because it is their personal truth, and I find nothing wrong with this type of statement.

Try learning to fly by flapping your arms, or to breathe underwater, or in an atmosphere without enough oxygen, because you have to. A lot of people throughout history have found themselves in those situations. Guess what they did?

...

...

...

They died!

I did learn how to socialize because I had to...and I learned how to do it very poorly. I had no idea, for years, that I was doing everything wrong. But I did learn how. Does that count?

I learned how to drive because I had to, and I'm a good driver now. If I didn't have to, I wouldn't have even bothered trying, because I was scared to learn.

I think the point that some people are making when they say things like that, is that they were forced to learn something that was either really difficult for them to do, or something that they were afraid to do.

I've had people tell me that if I was starving, I'd stop being a picky eater.

Which, firstly, what bearing does that have on a situation where I'm not starving but still need to eat? And secondly, honestly I'm not sure. When I get hypoglycemic I get even pickier because of overload. If I ever was starving, I might be the one who reacts totally differently from normal.

But how often do you hear "I tried to learn to do [X] because I had to/had no choice... but I failed because I couldn't do it"? It might be a type of reporting bias (I think that's the right type of bias), where you only hear about the successes - which makes it seem like all you have to do is try harder to succeed because you don't hear about the situations where people tried really hard and failed anyway.

People won't argue that there are physical obstacles that you can't 'just try harder' to overcome (in most cases), but they don't seem to be able to come to the same conclusions about a lot of mental obstacles (Semi-relevant link). Especially if you were able to do something at one point and now you can't.

Obviously, such statements imply that desire is the only thing required to succeed, and we all know that many goals are simply unattainable. Sometimes people just don't like the word "can't," especially if they want somebody to do something for them. Other times it's probably more innocent, e.g. it could be used to modestly play down the impressive nature of an achievement, or to counter excessive defeatism. Physical blocks to success are easier to see (and therefore believe), and in our case mental blocks are down to our invisible disability, which is easy to deny.

Kinda wondering what an example of what is truly impossible to do has to do with learning how to do something that is attainable, and then, learning how on your own.

I mean, I am really lost about the comparison.

BTW...people did learn to breathe underwater. Jacques Ives Cousteau did that the best, but it was something developed hundreds if not a thousand or so years ago with diving helmets.
So, maybe, just maybe there is a solution to the impossible too.

If the internet counts, then I had help. I never would have learned body language and other valuable social skills if I hadn't started googling, "how to make friends."

However, I do think the internet, books, and anything else you use to teach yourself should count as help, because without knowing how to do something someone is incapable of learning it. Sheer motivation certainly can be all you need, but even the most naturally gifted and determined individual will learn a lot faster if they have some guidance. Us autodidact's are no exception.

^^^^I kinda think that using research tools counts as self teaching.

Attending a class or being tutored counts as being helped.

That's why I asked about where the line is drawn before. But, that is where I draw the line. And regardless of the material to learn from (research, online search, books) it is still trial and error. Whereas being taught, you get a give and take of information...hopefully. Not been my experience in most cases. I know that if I'm in the right environment, it can shortcut my process by as much as 60 - 70 percent of the time wasted fumbling about. But, I have to be in the right environment.

I started in computers with the very first MACs as a work tool when they first arrived. Had played with Commodore and Amigas and even the early Apples before that.

There were no classes. There were no teachers. We were all fumbling about. We had to research and find and digest and break things and get singed a few times too. Nothing is in a vacuum though. You will always pick up things on forums, conversations and other areas of knowledge popping up. It helps fill in the gaps. But we basically had to get every magazine we could and just read, read, read.