In the first part, you learned why you should stop planning your career. In this next part, you’ll learn what you should do instead.

Let's go.

2-Step Career Growth Formula

First, you should be clear on this: career has no ceiling. You will never get to a point where you sit back, relax and say, “I won in my career.” You only grow until you die.

Career growth simply means earning more value from your work. Value in terms of respect, love, freedom, access, income, joy, gratitude and so on. Simply, meaningful growth, not just a so-called fancy “successful.” So here I use the word growth, not to mean growing over everyone around you; but your past self. In 2013, Nicolas Cole got a job as an entry-level copywriter at a boutique advertising agency downtown Chicago, and now, he runs 6 writing-related companies, self-published 10+ books and made $30,000,000 in revenue by writing content online. That's career growth. I'm talking about that.

So now, let's welcome Marc Andreessen again. In the first part, he declared the first rule of career planning (“Don't plan your career”) and now he's going to declare the next one—which fundamentally spikes career growth.

Yes, it's that simple.

You just need to give all your heart and soul to these two things in your career forever: skills and opportunities. They encompass almost everything. Doesn't matter whether you are in the period of World War I or COVID-19; doesn't matter if you are an oncologist or running a fast-food shop; doesn't matter whether you are crazily rich or dying homeless, this second rule of career planning works.

I turned Andreessen's rule into a formula, which I call the Career Growth Formula:

Today you'd pick LLM fine-tuning (skill), utilise an internship (opportunity) at OpenAI, and you grow your career. 100 years ago? You'd study radio engineering and utilise a position at Bell Labs. 1000 years ago? You'd learn metallurgy and utilise an apprenticeship in the Chola Empire. 10,000 years ago? You'd choose seed selection and seek a plot in the Fertile Crescent. See? No matter the context, the Formula fits pretty well.

Above, I picked these specific skills and opportunities that are relevant and hot at that particular period—for easy understanding. But you can choose any career path; the Formula stays the same. Just two steps.

• Step #1: Develop skills

• Step #2: Utilise opportunities

But most don't consider skills and opportunities at all. Instead, they build their careers based on these two popular but faulty factors:

• Degree (with scope)

• Job title

But both are incorrect and meaningless factors that do no help in your career growth. They are just toys to do mental masturbation.

Let me tell you why:

Degree (with scope)

When someone completes high school, the first question they often need to answer is, “Which degree are you going to choose?” and the follow-up question is “Does it have scope in the future?” What do they mean by scope? It means the degree's potential to get you a job quickly and to get you a decent salary as a fresher. Crap, obviously. Because you can't predict which degree would have scope in the future. Stop romanticising any degree and stop assuming it will be useful, relevant and rational in the future. Because it may not be. Assumptions are just that: assumptions.

When I was a kid, people around me claimed: “Engineering is the future.” Then a few years later, they started saying, “IT is the future.” And now they are saying, “AI is the future.” See, the scope is always changing—uncontrollable, external change. That so-called scope is based on its present potentiality, not the future. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, data science, such hot courses right now didn't exist in colleges just a few years ago. And yes, they may not exist on the hot list a few years from now. Nobody knows. Then why consider that shitty scope?

Job title

Another faulty factor. Most want to put a certain job title next to their names. As status symbols. But they don't realise that job title lacks action. It's vague. Anyone can be called “computer science engineer” after completing a degree. But to actually be one, they need to be very good at programming languages, algorithms, operating systems, computer networks and so on. The harsh truth is only a few graduates would say, “I'm a master in those skills.” Even if they don’t even know how to code new software of their own, they can still call themselves computer science engineers. Bad.

When I was in school, I wanted to call myself an architect. But for that, I didn’t practice sketching every day, I didn’t study for the entrance exam, I didn’t learn about geometry, hydrology or thermodynamics, I didn't observe my own home or other buildings I visited. Instead, I was just planning which college to enroll. Stupid kid I am. The moment I realised that I should be practising those skills if I really wanted to become an architect, I quit. I was valuing job titles over skills. As a result, I wasted five years of my life planning what I didn't actually want.

I hope now you can understand...

These two factors are NOT going to help you grow a meaningful career. Ditch 'em. Just put all your focus on these two factors instead: skills and opportunities.

Now, let's see how to actually apply the Career Growth Formula:

Step #1: Develop skills

Online gurus have made skills a cliché word. But developing your skills is the fundamental and foundational step in growing your career.

Now the question is...

How to choose your skill?

Step one: you don't. Choosing one particular skill and excelling in it is impossible. Let's say I'm learning how to play chess. I don't only learn about the movements of each piece. I also learn patience indirectly. No skill is singular; every skill has or needs some other skills to exist and to work well. So you can't pick a certain skill and build your career around it. You always need a skillstack.

Okay, then how to build a skillstack?

There's another formula.

Every usable skillstack consists of two symbiotic skill types:

• Intra-skills: Skills you love and are good at; don’t directly impact others

• Inter-skills: Skills that solve problems for others; don’t necessarily interest you

There is always this debate among students and freshers: should I do what I love? Or should I do what people need?

The answer is: both.

One type of skill without another is useless.

You can love coding (intra-skill), but if you don't know how to market your software (inter-skill), then your passion for coding is useless. Let me give you another example: you can be pretty fluent at speaking, but if you don't know what the truth behind the message you're propagating is, then you'd misguide your audience. See? Poor inter-skills not only make the intra-skills useless, but they also make them lousy. So having the right combo of skills is vital.

Which type comes first? Obviously, intra.

You feel some skills are naturally appealing. It can't be taught or forced. 99.99% chance you already have them. You don't even know why you love doing them. Maybe you love drawing cartoons or taking photos or playing cricket or designing posters or speaking in public or whatever. Just look at how you spend your free time. Look at what feels like play to you but work to others; they are your intra-skills. For me, they are writing and graphic design.

And inter-skills? They complement intra.

I started writing out of my own interest, not by googling which skills to develop. But once I found writing appealing, I needed to learn other complementary skills to thrive. Skills I should develop to educate my readers and persuade them to take action? Skills I should develop to publish a book through Amazon KDP? They're inter-skills. Though I won't necessarily want to practice such inter-skills, I still need to develop them to grow in my career. Without them, my writing skill, my intra-skill, is useless.

Okay, you know what skills you need to develop. Now the question is: how?

How to actually develop your skillstack?

There are two approaches: the learn-first approach and the work-first approach.

The former is the slowest and the most unproductive. Since our childhood, most of us are taught to practice this approach. “You need to know everything about it before doing”—that's how we dealt with skills. But actual skill development doesn't just come from reading a book or attending a lecture. It needs work. And, as discussed in the previous part, we shouldn't optimise for the future. A learn-first approach is basically a part of career-planning: you overvalue future possibilities of excellence, rather than present potentialities of execution. That's not good.

So yeah, the latter is the ideal approach: do the work. Mark Manson once bashed, “learning more is a smart person’s favourite form of procrastination.” So stop reading books on how to swim, just dive in. Build a small-scale project. Join a zero-stipend internship. Attend workshops and competitions. The bottom line is: the gap between working and learning should be as thin as possible. Your way of learning skills should be as practical as possible. Start with intra, do the work, and observe what inter-skills are being demanded for you to thrive. Then practice them too. That's a work-first approach, and that's how you actually develop your skillstack.

You might have noticed this...

To develop your skillstack, to do the work, you have to do that same thing which I defined as the second step of the Career Growth Formula: utilising opportunities.

Yeah, you can't develop a skill without utilising an opportunity and vice versa. Just for the sake of understanding did I split them into two steps, but both function symbiotically, simultaneously.

So now let's look at the other part, the next step.

Step #2: Utilise opportunities

After picking the right combo of intra-inter skills, you need to execute them fast, efficiently, and courageously. You need a relevant space to work every day, to develop your skillstack, and to grow in your career. I call that space ZOO.

Zone of Opportunities

It is where you create/discover opportunities and utilise them for career growth. If you want to be a digital writer, your Substack can be your ZOO. If you want to be a cyclist, your local cycling club can be your ZOO. If you want to be an entrepreneur, a startup incubation centre in your college can be your ZOO. You name it. (Of course, digital writer, cyclist, and entrepreneur, they are all job titles. Just replace them with its respective skills. Can you do that?)

So when you feel like you are not doing well in your career, see where you are standing. Are you in the ZOO? Or in the LOO—labyrinth of opportunities? If you expect growth from anywhere or wait for a perfect situation... You're wrong, it is a form of opportunity hyperopia. Just look for places where you can use your skillstack quickly and efficiently to hunt for opportunities. Don't choose your ZOO based on the outcome, but the process. And that process should be nothing but utilising opportunities.

With your skillstack, in your ZOO, you can only utilise these 2 types of opportunities.

I call them inbound and outbound.

Inbound opportunities

Opportunity knocks on your door? That's inbound. A byproduct of uncontrollable, external change of the future. You can't predict when it will appear and how long it will last. But once it appears, you need to be fast, efficient and courageous to utilise it. Otherwise, someone else in the same ZOO will. Let's say you love and are good at video editing and have posted awesome reels in your Instagram profile–your ZOO. An entrepreneur watches your reels and sends a DM asking you to work for her business. An inbound opportunity. And when you hesitate, she will go to some other profile to do the work.

Outbound opportunities

Instead of waiting for an opportunity to knock on your door, you go out and create one. That's outbound. A byproduct of your voluntary, internal change in the present. You can create opportunities anytime in the ZOO and utilise them as long as you can. It is totally up to you. Let's say you are a writer who wants to publish a book. If you self-publish using Amazon KDP—the ZOO (instead of waiting for publishing houses to accept your deal), then it is an outbound opportunity. And boy, the utilisation of this opportunity is totally up to you.

Okay, now let's put 'em together:

Create and utilise an outbound opportunity. Discover and utilise an inbound opportunity. Repeat.

Inbound opportunities won't knock on your door just because you're on the ZOO. You need to attract them. How? By utilising outbound opportunities. Yeah, outbound opportunities are how you basically initiate your career growth. You need to prove you're capable with your skillstack. Then eventually, inbound opportunities will knock on your door. But don't worry. Outbound opportunities need not be humongous, it can be small, easy, and comfortable. The only thing is it must pull inbound opportunities to the doorstep.

For example, when he was 17, Jay Yang cold-emailed (ZOO) with a 19-slide pitch deck explaining all the problems Noah Kagan had in his content marketing systems and gave practical solutions (with his skillstack) to fix them. Noah didn't ask him—in fact, he didn't even know about Jay. But still, Jay went out and created this opportunity. You know what happened next? He became Head of Content for Noah and got connections with successful entrepreneurs, which eventually attracted many high-value opportunities to his doorstep. Especially to work with Alex Hormozi's marketing team to launch his latest book that later achieved the Guinness World Record. Jay Yang created and utilised an opportunity (outbound) with Noah Kagan, and out of that, he discovered and utilised another opportunity (inbound) with Alex Hormozi. This is how you use outbound to pull inbound.

The more outbound opportunities you create and utilise, the more inbound opportunities you can discover and utilise.

And the rest is pure iteration: just keep doubling down on what works.

Develop better skills.

Utilise bigger opportunities.

AAANND…. Your career is already in growth. So just keep growing!

Let me summarise the whole essay in 7 bullet points:

What to do instead of planning your career

• First of all, a career has no destiny; you only grow until death. Which means earning more and more value from your work than your past self until you die.

• You should not go after degrees (with scope) or job titles. They are faulty factors. Just focus on these 2 factors instead: skills and opportunities.

• Career Growth Formula derived from Marc Andreessen's second rule of career planning: develop skills + utilise opportunities = career growth

• Step #1: Develop skills. No skill is singular; every skill has or needs some other skills to exist and to work well. So build a skillstack—intra-skills + inter-skills. The former are what you love and are good at. The latter are what solve problems for others and don’t necessarily interest you. You can develop them by choosing a work-first approach, not a learn-first approach.

• You can’t develop a skill without utilising an opportunity and vice versa. I split them into two steps just for understanding. But both function symbiotically, simultaneously.

• Step #2: Utilise opportunities. After choosing a skillstack, you need a space to work on. That is ZOO—Zone of Opportunities. It is where you create/discover opportunities and utilise them for career growth. What you create is an outbound opportunity, and what you discover is an inbound opportunity. Using your skillstack, you need to utilise outbound, then you will discover more inbound to utilise.

• The rest is iteration. Keep developing your skillstack. Keep utilising opportunities from your ZOO. Keep growing!

This two-part essay is what I would give to my past self…

Who was planning to become a cartoonist without considering inter-skills and uncontrollable, external change of the future; who was planning which architecture college to enrol in by making voluntary, internal change focusing on faulty factors (instead of skills and opportunities); who was planning to build a startup and go abroad for undergraduate by doing mental masturbation instead of applying the Career Growth Formula.

If you are someone like I was, this essay is just for you. Please use it.

And kindly share it with your friends or relatives if you think it might help them too.

Cheers!

None of those plans became real. All my beliefs about career planning were wrong.

Let’s understand why.

2 BIG Reasons Why Career Planning is Stupid

You might disagree with me, but possibly not someone who co-founded multiple successful companies like Netscape and a16z.

That someone is Marc Andreessen.

I’m not going to talk about his political stand, but when he wrote, “The first rule of career planning: Do not plan your career,” he was bloody right. And he didn’t stop there; he explained to us why.

Reason #1: The future is unpredictable

Do you think this reason is lazy, cowardly, or unproductive? Would it serve only as an excuse for those who don’t care about tomorrow, don’t want to take risks, or don’t want to see results? Do you think like that?

If yes, I’m sorry, you are completely wrong. Let me explain...

Many motivational speakers would quote Eleanor Roosevelt that “the future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams” or Malcom X that “the future belongs to those who prepare for it today.” But both ideas are vague and inaccurate, especially the first one (it’s just pure blind trust). Yes, the future does not belong to those who believe in their dreams or those who prepare for it today. Then who? The correct answer is: nobody.

The future belongs to literally no one. By saying “belongs to,” what we emphasise is the control of the future consequences. But can any creature 100% control it? Obviously, no. No amount of manifestation or hard work can guarantee control of the future. You might think planning your career gives you the ability to make it easy and certain. No, it won’t. You simply can’t plan your career.

Andreessen explains why: “You can’t plan your career because you have no idea what’s going to happen in the future. You have no idea what industries you’ll enter, what companies you’ll work for, what roles you’ll have, where you’ll live, or what you will ultimately contribute to the world. You’ll change, industries will change, the world will change, and you can’t possibly predict any of it.”

He indirectly stated 2 possibilities of change causing unpredictability, especially in our careers:

• Uncontrollable, external change

People in the pre-calculator era had plans to join large companies to count their payroll. People in the pre-Grammarly era had plans to join the press to proofread articles. People in the pre-Perplexity era had plans to join with authors and researchers to curate resources for their work. Now those jobs are completely outdated. This is uncontrollable, external change. That makes the career plan irrelevant, useless, and arguably stupid. And if those people are determined to follow their career plans here in 2026, they will very likely face drawbacks. So some would make contemporary decisions afterwards, and that leads us to another possibility of change...

• Voluntary, internal change

I gave up on my career plan of becoming an architect, which I had for 5 years, just because I don’t feel like practising the craft. I had an unspeakable pain both to renounce the plan and to execute the plan. But even though I had more clarity than otherwise and was determined in it for a long time, I gave up anyway. This is a voluntary, internal change. That makes our career plan ugly, fruitless, and once again stupid. And if I didn’t give up on that career plan to satisfy my ego, I would most possibly have faced drawbacks. So I’m glad I made a contemporary decision not to choose architecture.

Now you know, “the future is unpredictable” is not an excuse given by those who don’t care about tomorrow, or don’t want to take risks, or don’t want to see results. In fact, the opposite is often the truth. Because people who accept the unpredictability and work accordingly are the ones who actually care about tomorrow, want to take risks, and see results. They don’t predict their odds; they just defy them right now—by utilising current opportunities.

And that leads us to the second reason why career planning is stupid and also the painful cost of career planning (that school didn’t warn you about)...

Reason #2: You lose opportunities

By the way, why do we choose to plan our careers?

We choose it because it gives us hope, clarity and a boatload of dopamine (“feel-good” chemical). To pour fuel on this fire, we even do mental masturbation. Author and entrepreneur Dan Koe coined it, and this is how he defines it: “The process of raising dopamine in the brain by telling people your goals, plans, and how you want to change, but never actually doing anything about it.” Hope and clarity are just excuses; dopamine is the actual reason.

Most plan their careers not solely because they want to succeed. Often it’s because they want to feel good right at this moment. So they spend a lot of time and energy on planning their careers and telling people about it.

Now the question is: at what cost?

Andreessen answers it: “Trying to plan your career is an exercise in futility that will only serve to frustrate you, and to blind you to the really significant opportunities that life will throw your way.”

From his words, we can see that career planning will help us get two things: To get frustrated. To get blinded to opportunities. I think both are highly interconnected. You get frustrated because you don’t make any progress, and you don’t make any progress because you aren’t utilising any opportunities. That’s why I combined the consequences “getting frustrated” and “getting blinded to opportunities” into one reason for why career planning is stupid: losing opportunities.

Okay, but how do we actually lose opportunities by planning? Simple, there’s no action.

Planning alone brings no progress. Even if you have a genius 100-page plan, you still need to execute it. But as you already find enough dopamine from planning itself, you don’t want to do the work and get the results. Plans give the same dopamine hits that you will get from working and getting results. So, as you are already satisfied with your plans, your inner self is not ready to face the terror: “Will my plan work?” So you’d just continue to avoid the execution of the plans, maybe hold your streak in mental masturbation sessions, and start looking at future possibilities by ignoring present opportunities (which I call opportunity hyperopia).

Ultimately, you lose opportunities.

Andreessen then equated, “Career planning = career-limiting.”

How? Let me summarise the 3 above-mentioned behaviours of career planners that help them limit their career growth:

1. Career planners are not adaptable to the uncontrollable, external changes of the future

2. Career planners don’t want to dissatisfy their ego by making voluntary, internal changes

3. Career planners are busy doing mental masturbation and suffer from opportunity hyperopia

No changes. No opportunities. No growth.

If you want to limit your career growth, just adopt the above behaviours of career planners.

By the way, I was also a pro career planner.

• When I had a plan to become a cartoonist for 9 years, I was not adaptable to the uncontrollable, external changes of the future (not trying digital arts or animation)

• When I had a plan to practice architecture for 5 years, I didn’t want to dissatisfy my ego by making voluntary, internal changes (kept making excuses to not give up on my fruitless architect dream)

• When I had plans to build a startup, join a graphic design course, and go abroad for my undergraduate, all I was doing was mental masturbation and suffered from opportunity hyperopia (spent a lot of time and energy planning my career and felt terribly frustrated when every plan became unaccomplished)

So don’t be like how I was.

Don’t limit your career growth. Don’t lose opportunities. Don’t try to predict the future. Don’t plan your career.

In this first part, you learned why you should stop planning your career. In the next part, you’ll know what you should do instead (Hint: a two-step formula for career growth). Stay tuned!

After that, I've read some other books: Ikigai, The Compound Effect, Agriculture For Beginners, and so on. But I found every single one of them boring, and I quit them. Screw you all!

But the day I finished Steal Like An Artist trilogy (within two weeks!!) was the day I stopped screwing every author—for making me feel bored while reading non-fiction books every day. Now, I follow 6 rules (instead of screwing).

But before revealing them, let me answer the main question:

3 Silly Reasons Why You (Easily) Quit Reading Books

Reason #1: You set woo-woo goals

“I want to complete this book in a single day.” “I will read 100 pages per day.” Goals like these might sound sigma, but that's the problem.

Everyone has the same 24 hours. So by adding a new habit to your to-do list, you are automatically removing a current habit. So for every new habit, you face two different emotions: anxiety and excitement. Anxiety, because you are violating your old comfortable lifestyle by forcibly removing a habit. Excitement, because you are creating a different lifestyle by voluntarily adding a new habit. Which emotion outgrows the other defines whether you quit it or not.

Therefore, when you set woo-woo goals—as you definitely can't do them—you entertain the “anxious” emotion. And you quit.

Reason #2: You read what others like

A wise man once wrote, “Read what you love until you love to read.” His name is Naval Ravikant and he's bloody right.

Almost every newbie reader chooses a certain book simply because it is popular, to brag about it with their buddies online (I, too, did that with Atomic Habits). Not because they actually want to read that book. They don't read what they like; they just read what others might like. Getting people's appreciation is all they want. And once they get it (or fail to get it), they have no convincing reason to keep reading.

So, even if they hold a bestseller in their hands or a book that can actually help them become a better person, they will throw it into the trash.

Reason #3: You make it a chore, not a hobby

When you perceive reading as dish-washing—not as m*sturbation—quitting it becomes easy-peasy.

Why is dish-washing boring while m*sturbation isn't? One of the biggest reasons is: effortless and fun process. That's why children on p*rn sites are dangerously higher in number than parents in libraries. Instagram pays millions to its UI/UX designers to make the app as effortless and fun as possible. That's why when your mind gets to make a choice—“P*rn site or library?” or “Instagram or books?”—it easily chooses the first options.

Just make reading as effortful and boring as possible. Then you will choose something else (probably p*rn or Instagram).

The above 3 are the primary (or the only) reasons why you easily quit reading books.

They are exactly what I did in the past too. I set a woo-woo goal to read Atomic Habits even though I didn't actually like the book, and it felt pretty hard and boring like a chore. Result? 341 days of reading and quitting and reading and quitting and reading to finish it.

Don't be like me.

Follow the 6 upcoming rules.

Instead of entertaining your “anxious” emotion. Instead of wanting people’s appreciation. Instead of making books an effortful and boring option.

6 Unpopular Rules To Read Non-fiction Books Every Single Day (Without Getting Bored)

Rule #1: Choose the promise, not the popularity

Millions of people reading a particular book doesn't mean YOU need to read it too. Look for the promise of the book before deciding to read it. I mean the subtitle or the introduction; they summarize the outcomes the author promises to deliver through the book: answer to a specific question, solution to a specific problem, or whatever. But if you neither want the answer nor the solution from the book you are choosing, then all you want is to flex. Nothing more.

For example, I read Atomic Habits for its popularity (“International Bestseller” on the cover), while I read The 22 Laws of Category Design for its promise (subtitle: “Name & Claim Your Niche, Share Your POV, And Move The World From Where It Is To Somewhere Different”). But the latter is the one that has enormous value (for me) on every single page and completely changed the way I look at the world, while the former tested my sanity like hell. So now you know which book to choose.

Rule #2: Don't obsess over print books

An average library in your town most probably doesn't have all the books you want to read. Amazon.com? An average paperback costs ₹199. So you hold yourself back from reading by pointing out the scarcity of print books or your poverty to buy them—believing only print books are real books. But here's what one of the top book reviewers, Alex Wieckowski, says: “Ebooks count as reading. Print books count as reading. Audiobooks count as reading. Braille books count as reading. The only thing that doesn't count as reading is not reading.”

So, if you can't afford print books, go after alternatives: PDF, EPUB, Kindle, Audible, or whatever is affordable and convenient. I have read 30+ books so far. But I own only 3 print books. The rest of the books were downloaded from OceanofPDF.com or directly from the authors’ websites—and honorable mention: 2 audiobooks on Audible. Of course, print books have an aura, but you are not reading for it. The ultimate purpose of reading books is to take action based on what you read. So, format doesn't matter. Words to works, that's it.

Rule #3: Skip or skim, but never push-read

After choosing a book, after choosing its format, and after opening it to read the very first word, pause… Tell yourself: “The goal is not to complete this book, but to take necessary actions out of this book for a better future.” Many people try to grind all the way to the last page without taking anything out of it. Waste of time. And it is far better to skip useless parts or skim through boring paragraphs than to forcibly read page by page, word by word.

Don't take my word for it. Here's what Mark Manson, who reads 60–75+ books a year, advised: “If you run into a section in a book that isn’t interesting to you or that you already know a fair amount about—skip it! I can’t tell you how many psychology books talk about the damn ‘Marshmallow Study’ from 1972. I’ve read about it a dozen times at this point, so when I see it in a book, I skip it! Sometimes I’ll even do this within the same page. I’ll hit a paragraph that is repetitive. I’ll skip it. Then realize that I missed something, jump up halfway through the page, skim a few lines, find the info I need, then go jump back to the end of the page again.” Genius, isn't it?

Rule #4: Juggle multiple books a day

Would you eat the same bread-and-jam for breakfast, lunch, and dinner every single day for a month? Yuck! Even your favorite food would taste like crap after eating it too many times. Because your brain craves novelty. You reach a saturation point after thinking about the same thing for a long time. That's why you need a mix. Read 3 or more books a day. When you get saturated with one book, jump onto another. By doing this, you're building multiple loopholes in your mind, each waiting for the answer or solution promised by the author to get closed.

Currently, I'm reading 6 books: Stories Sell, Great Leads, The War of Art, Building a StoryBrand 2.0, The Art of Spending Money, and How to Market a Love Story. And I’ve read a few pages or chapters of some other books, too, and let them stay in my reading list, like: Rework, Run Right, Who Not How, DotCom Secrets, The Pathless Path, Discipline is Destiny, Feel-Good Productivity, The Anthology of Balaji, and The One World Schoolhouse. But 5 years ago, I prevented myself from reading any other book except Atomic Habits until I completed it. And the rest is boring history.

Rule #5: Read anywhere, anytime

A man who strictly reads only at 5 PM, drinking his favorite cup of coffee, sitting on a comfy bean bag, facing the sunset in his home's backyard patio, is a fool. He doesn't respect books the way he should. Books must not be treated like distant relatives; they are your best friends. Do you strictly talk to your best friend only under the above-mentioned scenario? No, right? Because if you do that, you are an arrogant piece of crap!

This is one of Ryan Holiday's rules of reading: “Always carry a book.” He confessed, “I've read on airplanes. I've read in doctor's offices. One year, I won a Grammy and I read while I was sitting in the audience waiting for the awards to be given out.” Might sound like bragging, but I'm damn sure he doesn't sound like an arrogant piece of crap who only reads under perfect situations. Most people can't find time in their busy day to read books. The reason is: they don't follow this rule.

Rule #6: Quit bad and ugly

Life is very, very short to read all the books. Hundreds (if not thousands) of new non-fiction books get published every year. So if you take an oath to read all of them, you will definitely die with regret. And come on, you don't eat what you don't like, so why not do the same for books? Read only what is good, what you like, and what you need. If not, give that book to someone else or burn it into ashes! Without any guilt.

Here's a list of bestsellers I quit reading (because they are bad and ugly “to me”): Ikigai, Can't Hurt Me, Rich Dad Poor Dad, The 4-Hour Workweek, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, and How to Win Friends and Influence People. These books helped a lot of people change their lives, but not me. And I don't feel guilty about it. Even if I publish a book tomorrow, I won't punch you in the face if you call it “bad and ugly” and throw it into the trash.

That's it.

Here's a quick playbook I would give my past self (after slapping him) if I could go back in time:

6 steps to follow:

• Choose the promise

• Pick any affordable format

• Skip or skim when get stuck

• Juggle 3 or more books a day

• Read them anywhere, anytime

• Quit if anything is bad and ugly

3 mistakes to avoid:

• Don't set woo-woo goals

• Don't read what others like

• Don't make reading a chore

Take a screenshot. Print it out. Paste it on your desk. And use it right away. Cheers!

The seniors made strong claims about why male ego exists. They properly answered the questions my friend asked. They revealed their own challenges and depressive incidents caused by toxic misogynistic criminals in their lives.

But my friend kept making the same pointless claims again and again.

He didn't listen to them.

He just waited for his turn to say the same thing.

People like my friend blindly believe they are always right and never accept if they are wrong. They fear no one, they never give up, and they somehow need to win the argument. And their key strategy is: Just keep talking, don't listen.

We have all faced such people in our lives. Even you could be one of them too—without realizing it.

But we don't make this “waiting to talk” mistake only during arguments. But even in regular conversations.

This February, I got an opportunity to discuss with one of my classmates about the upcoming inauguration of our department's book club. That guy... Oh God, he talked for more than 10 minutes about the manga he was going to present on stage. I listened to him without interrupting or breaking eye contact (even though I was not actually interested in what he was saying). But as soon as I started talking to him, he was looking somewhere else and nodding with a deadpan face.

Aaaghh! It hurts even to imagine.

Just like my friend, he didn't want to listen. He just wanted to talk as long as he could.

People like my friend and that manga guy, while talking, feel like there's a spotlight glowing upon their heads and everyone is waiting for them to speak non-stop. And while the other person is talking, they feel like someone from the audience is interrupting their performance. They don't even consider the other person's thoughts and opinions. They use the OG Aristotle's Model of Communication as their playbook (it is kinda fascism, I’d argue).

And me?

Well, if you think I'm a great communicator, you're DAMN wrong! Yes, I'm a great listener, but I'm pretty dumb at talking.

I don't wait to talk while the other person is talking. But sadly, I don't talk well either.

During Class 12, I once carefully listened to two bullies verbally abusing my friend sitting next to me at the last bench of the classroom. I didn't say anything. I just gave an awkward laugh until they stopped bullying him by themselves.

Recently, I was waiting at a bus stop after college. A rickshaw driver told his fellow drivers to stand up from the benches so that passengers (including me), who were standing under the sun, could sit. But those drivers scolded him, “This is a public place. Who are you to question us?” He got humiliated, and we were just listening. He spoke up for us as a single man. But we, as a group of people, didn't speak up for him.

Sometimes, like in the above two scenarios, many people lean more towards listening rather than speaking up. They don't wait to talk; they hesitate to talk.

Both are wrong:

• Waiting to talk—talking without listening—is wrong

• Hesitating to talk—listening without talking—is also wrong

If you do any of the above two or both, like me and the people mentioned above, please accept that you are a terrible communicator.

And when you are a terrible communicator, you don't value people's feelings, people don't value your words, you don't stand up against injustice, people can easily harm you and your loved ones, and so on.

Ultimately, you live a terribly hard life.

So to become a great communicator (and live a pretty easy life), you need to precisely know when to listen and when to speak. Everything else—including eye contact—will come after that.

But when I was a kid, I felt smoking and drinking were cool.

I once rolled a piece of paper, depicted smoking on the last bench, and dropped it when I saw the P.T. teacher crossing our classroom. And I once poured water into a glass cup my dad brought from KSA and drank it as if it were alcohol.

Now I realise that I was stupid, not cool.

Here's why:

Last year, on 6th September, I talked with a 60-year-old watchman in the parking lot of a private property. That was the first time I interviewed someone as a student journalist.

His name is Gopal. He has been working as a security guard at construction sites for more than a decade. He looks so humble and innocent that if he gets into a crowded bus, young people would definitely give up their seats for him. Yup, the lowest-risk victim I could find to conduct my first interview.

But in his 30s, he was not who he is now.

Gopal was an intense smoker and an alcoholic.

He confessed and sobbed that because of his intoxication, he cheated on his wife, got fired from his government job, was abandoned by his own family, including his daughter, and almost died from lung cancer.

Now he sits all day, every day in that parking lot regretting his entire life.

You might think people like Gopal are rare. But no, it's not a rare case. Once you get addicted to smoking, drinking, or taking drugs, the ultimate consequences you end up facing would be very similar to what Gopal faced a decade ago.

Or something even worse.

There are millions of stories like Gopal's yet to be told.

I'm not exaggerating. Check out the fact sheets of the World Health Organisation: Tobacco and Alcohol.

And after talking to Gopal, I realised that as a journalist, my job is not just to record and publish what people say, but to bring the truth out naked under the spotlight.

The truth I discovered from that parking lot is:

Smoking and boozing are not cool.

Go to Netflix, choose any A-rated movie, and you can definitely find a boozer, smoker, or both. Yes, they are indirectly advertising.

They can't advertise crap on billboards with bold letters saying, "BUY THIS CRAP! 60% OFF!" So instead, they use protagonists on screen to do the job.

It's called lifestyle marketing.

They don't sell you crap. They sell you the "cool" lifestyle of smoking under a street lamp on a cold midnight and drinking with buddies in a bar full of neon lights.

You don't want crap. You want to feel cool, with extra dopamine.

But again, it's not cool. They just manipulate you to believe that it is, to make a shipload of money.

So that's why I called myself stupid for depicting smoking and drinking alcohol as if I was doing something cool.

Okay, let me be straightforward:

People who smoke or booze are selfishly stupid.

Because:

• They don't care about their job

• They don't care about their family

• They don't even care about themselves

They just buy a cheap, short-term feeling of “cool” in exchange for a high-value, long-term feeling of peace.

Gopal, with all his heart, regretted why he was selfishly stupid and begged the younger generation (you and me) not to fall into the trap he had fallen into.

So do you still want to be like those selfishly stupid people and suffer your entire life like Gopal?

If your answer is no, then just stop consuming that crap.

No doubt, being a teetotaller is the real cool.

Throughout the semester, I wrote 5 news articles, and the external examiner inside the room was going to evaluate them.

I was excited. Not anxious or scared.

Why?

Because I chose this course with utmost passion, unlike 90% of my classmates who chose it for faulty reasons or because they had no other option. I know and love what I'm doing. So far, I have been one of the most appreciated students in my class, and I have even helped most of my classmates with their projects.

So I strongly believed that this viva was going to be awesome.

While I was thinking all this, the previous roll number was coming out of the room. Now it's my turn; I'm going inside.

When I sat in front of the examiner, the first question she asked was, “Why did you choose journalism?” I replied, “I love writing and design.” She nodded positively, slowly turned the pages of my project file, and her face turned into disappointment.

“Did you use AI?” she asked.

“Yes, but not wholly. I just dumped my report and got the rough draft.”

She sighed. “There are no mistakes here; it is perfect. So it must be AI-generated.” She pointed out my usage of italics and justified alignment, which I would use even if I didn't use AI at all. I said that I had been writing online for the last 3 years, and that's why it looks perfect.

But she didn’t accept it.

“As you wanted to be a writer, you must have written it 100% on your own, right? I would give you full marks if I saw any mistakes here. But there are none. So how can I evaluate it?”

I couldn't say anything. She made strong claims.

Finally, she advised me (in a strict manner) not to use AI in the upcoming semester. She also suggested that I try writing in Tamil, our mother tongue.

I exited the exam room with a broken heart. I couldn't accept what had just happened. I realised I'm not the best.

Yes, I had an option to avoid the examiner's criticism by saying that she made it with prejudice or that she didn’t know anything about my writing.

But no, I didn’t choose avoidance.

And I wasn't killing myself either.

Instead, I considered it a learning curve.

In the next semester, after 164 days, I was waiting inside the same exam room. For the same external examiner. And this semester, it's not five—I had to submit 13 news articles!

I was excited. But not like the last time.

My turn had come. I sat in front of the examiner. No, she didn't remember me. And just like before, she slowly started to turn the pages of my project file. But this time, her face didn't turn into disappointment.

In the last viva, she made two major criticisms:

1. You should not have used AI

2. You should have tried writing in Tamil

But in this viva, she didn't give any heartbreaking criticisms. Yeah, I submitted without using any rough drafts from ChatGPT and wrote 9 out of 13 articles in Tamil. In fact, she appreciated my projects a lot, and most importantly, I had learned many valuable lessons on writing after the last viva.

The same examiner, who once bashed my writing, wished me a good future.

Now I'm exiting the same exam room with a happy heart.

All because of one thing:

I didn't avoid the criticisms.

And I followed what the examiner said.

But most Gen Zers (like my past self) don't want to accept criticism or follow advice. They say, “I do what I love. And I don't care what people say about it.” As a result, they don't grow and just keep living a bare minimum life.

And no, don't confuse teasing, bullying, or faulty opinions with criticism. They are different. Criticisms are NOT meant to bog you down. They are meant to lift you up. To help you get better. To help you rectify mistakes. To help you become successful.

So here's the rule of thumb:

The more you run away from criticism, the longer it takes to become successful.

Simply, avoiding criticism is avoiding success.

This rule works for almost every aspect of life.

• Want to score a high GPA? Then you need to consider your professor's criticisms of your mistakes in internal exams.

• Want to build a profitable business? Then you need to consider your clients' criticisms about your flawed product.

• Want a happy marriage? Then you need to consider your spouse’s criticisms about your ill behaviour.

So the next time someone criticises you by pointing out your mistakes, don't call yourself sigma and avoid them.

Instead, listen to them and follow their advice.

To get better.

To rectify mistakes.

To become successful.

But what should you do if someone gives you faulty opinions instead of advice? Listen, but don't follow. Click here to learn more.

But a few weeks ago, I faced 2 incidents that taught me a harsh lesson about asking for an apology.

1. A senior and I were waiting at a bus stop after college. When the bus came, many passengers rushed to get in, including us. The senior went first. I was talking with him, and when I stepped on the entrance stairs of the bus, an old man also stepped on. We both took the stairs at the same time. And I entered first. The old man started scolding me. And without any argument, I said sorry to him. And the senior told me, “Don’t say sorry for this.”

2. One of my professors started an initiative called Election Coverage: a short-video series explaining every Legislative Assembly constituency of the state. I was hired as one of the students who needed to explain in front of the camera. I wrote and memorised my script. But when the camera was rolling, I forgot the lines again and again and again. For each time I forgot, I said sorry. And one of my seniors, who was handling the camera, asked me, “Why are you saying sorry? It is not a big thing.”

The above 2 incidents might sound simple, but they made me contemplate a very valuable question: “When should I use sorry?”

And here's what I learned after contemplation:

Many people (including my past self) believe that frequently asking for an apology makes us generous people. They tell themselves, “I don’t harm anybody, I’m kind to everyone even though they harm me.”

At a surface level, it seems holy. Yeah, it is not completely wrong. But overusing sorry has 3 serious consequences (and we need to consider them):

1. It reduces the value of sorry

If something is abundant, it automatically loses its value. That’s why we value gold more than we value water (even though water is very, very vital than gold); because water is abundant while gold is rare. So the point is: the more you say sorry, the less you value it.

During the Election Coverage video shoot, I realised I was overusing sorry without really meaning it. Which means: I don’t give any value to that S-word.

2. It makes you emotionally weak

Every sorry is a confession that you are wrong. Of course, no one is perfect. But by overusing sorry, a) you’re confessing that you’re wrong even if you aren’t and b) you subconsciously tell yourself, “I always make mistakes, I’m always wrong, I can’t do anything good.” That belief makes you emotionally weak.

It was not just to the old man on the bus. I said sorry like it was the first step when someone scolded or criticised me. Such behaviour kills my worthiness and makes me a weaker option in the room.

3. It facilitates oppression and injustice

When an oppressed person easily gives up and says sorry to the oppressor, it is not that the oppressed person is holy but cowardly to stand up against injustice. And if there is no one to stand up against injustice, you know what will happen.

Yeah, I knew how to apologise but not how to stand up for justice. I was ready to say, “I’m wrong” but not “You’re wrong.” What if the old man was wrong when he scolded me on a crowded bus?

Now, after knowing the 3 major consequences of overusing sorry, let’s answer the question, “When should I use sorry?”

The answer is dead simple:

Use it when you are actually wrong.

Well, I'm not saying you should underuse sorry. Some people are ready to do anything but not say the S-word. Even if they know they are wrong, they don’t use it.

Underusing sorry has the same major consequences as overusing it. If you underuse sorry, it means:

• You don’t value it

• You are emotionally weak

• You facilitate oppression and injustice

Therefore, the right way of apologising is balanced.

You should not overuse sorry—apologising even if the other person is wrong. You should not underuse sorry—not apologising even if you know or it is proven that you are wrong.

Finally, if you still believe that a person who always apologises to others is the kindest, then understand YOU’RE WRONG (and I’m not sorry).

Why?

For 4 big reasons.

1. Useless infrastructure: No library. No auditorium. No proper labs—we had broken apparatus, decomposed chemicals, and laggy computers from the 90s. And finally, we got only a ~50 sq. ft. playground.

2. Useless teachers: An English teacher who didn't know how to pronounce “teenager.” A Maths teacher who looked up guides before solving on the board. A Computer Science teacher who didn't know how programming languages work. And much more.

3. Useless assignments: During holidays, at home, we wrote the answers for the exams on A4 sheets by looking them up. The worst part: Many times, the teachers didn't even ask for this assignment after the school reopened.

4. Useless exams: In Chemistry and Physics practicals, there was no apparatus. We just wrote the results and observations by memorising them the previous night. And in Computer Science practicals, we mugged up and handwrote C++ and Python code on paper. Yes, paper!

No, no.

It is NOT a free government school for low-class kids. My dad paid ₹30,000–50,000 every year! No doubt, it is one of the most useless investments my dad has ever made.

Moreover, while studying in this useless school, the “Matrix is real” content was on trend. So blaming the whole education system became a piece of cake for me. I simply couldn't accept the fact that my school was so useless.

But you know what THE most useless thing I had done in school was?

It was “blaming the school” itself.

Theoretically, I was not wrong. But practically, my blaming sessions led nowhere good. In fact, the time I spent blaming was not only useless; it actually ruined my teenage life inapparently.

How?

Due to blaming the whole education system, I didn't want to join a college. So after completing that most useless school, I was clueless. It felt like walking through a maze blindfolded. I used to think I would become successful by ditching the default path to career success. Yes, it is true to some level, but for an Indian middle-class kid whose father has a boatload of debts, it is a suicide mission.

Successful people who ditched the default path had adequate support behind them. They didn't risk their whole life for something they weren't sure of achieving. But as a passive blaming person, I ditched the default path without adequate support behind me. I risked my whole life for something I wasn't sure to achieve.

Consequence?

A year full of shame, regret, and anxiety!

Now I understood blaming the education system doesn't change anything. You either have to appeal for a better education system by protesting democratically. Or, as Nicolas Cole would say:

Squeeze as much juice as possible from your school or college.

Self-educate useful lessons from your textbooks. Organise a team (of your classmates) to build something useful. Make a useful professor your personal mentor. Attend useful workshops, competitions, and internships using your institution ID card.

Never forget there will always be something useful in every institution. Even in the worst ones you can find. (Yeah, that includes the most useless school I studied in.)

So, don't settle.

Don't expect excellence by simply sitting in your classroom nodding to lectures without understanding anything. And then blame the education system for having a useless career.

School and college are nothing but places full of opportunities.

They don't spoon-feed everything you need. It is your sole responsibility to utilise opportunities that you can never find elsewhere. You can outgrow every student in your class with the same curriculum, having the same resources, and paying the same amount of fees. The only difference is: you utilise opportunities which they don't.

After learning such useful lessons, I stopped blaming the education system. I stopped refusing to join college. I stopped leaving behind opportunities that I can never find elsewhere.

Now I'm studying journalism under a Bachelor of Vocational program. But this time, I don't expect my professors to spoon-feed excellence. And I take sole responsibility to utilise every useful opportunity I can find in my college. As a result, I don't even get time to blame the education system.

So, here's the bottom line:

If you think your school or college is useless, then shut your mouth. Instead of blaming, find ways to utilise as many useful (but inapparent) opportunities as possible.

Because at the end of the day, blaming the useless education system is more useless than studying in it.

But it's not a bluff.

Except God, no one knows when I will die, where I will die, or how I will die. Maybe I will die of a heart attack in the next 2 hours while scrolling YouTube Shorts.

Nobody can say it is impossible.

Because it actually isn't.

I had two sisters and one brother. I'm the last child. And if you ask my 5-year-old self, “Who is your favourite sibling?” that innocent kid would tell you, “My eldest sister.” Because she used to be the one who always stood for me and pampered me after mom's or brother's scoldings.

On one early morning of February 2014, when I was 7 years old, my uncles were waking me up. They told me to get ready. One of my uncles drove the car to his home, and while walking inside the home, I saw my family members, one after another, bowing their heads down, standing next to a mortuary freezer box. That was the worst morning I ever woke up to.

And what if she thought, “I want to talk to my little brother one last time,” while moving towards the hospital in the van, while breathing her last seconds of breath?

The harsh fact is: She couldn’t talk to me. Her time of death had come.

I didn't even remember what her last words to me were. And when I try to remember what my last words to her were, I only remember, “Go die,” which I once told her when I got mad. Now, I cannot do anything to apologise to her. The time had already passed.

You know what?

We all live in such situations all the time. We are all going to die or lose our loved ones very soon. Sooner than we wish. But the question is not when; it is “are we ready?”

Hey, it is 9:05 p.m. now! I have just a few minutes left. What should I do now? The clock is ticking. I'm losing seconds after seconds which I can never get back.

So if it were the last seconds of my breath:

I would apologise to everyone whom I feel that I did wrong to. I will affirm my faith in God. And I would ask Him for paradise—where I want to live with all my loved ones including my sister, forever.

Oh-oh. It's already 9:16 p.m. Two hours have gone really fast. I think I’m writing slowly.

Okay, let me give you this final reminder (before I can't):

Not everyone gets time to do all the above. So even while living your normal day, you should keep reminding yourself, “I don't have much time” and live accordingly. Because…

They named it “Bibliora,” designed a poster, booked a venue, invited the guests, and formed a team of emcees, techies, and speakers who would present specific books for the inauguration of the club. I was chosen as one of the speakers. I decided to present Deep Work by Cal Newport. Spent hours writing my presentation script on Google Docs and was speaking to myself as if I was standing in front of the audience.

But just a day before the event, the professor told me, “I'm canceling this program.”

Yeah, I had the same question as you: “Why, sir?”

“It feels like I was forcing you,” he said. And from his face, I could clearly understand that he was upset. I couldn't say anything to him. He just walked off.

The next day, while taking the lecture, he pointed me out and said, “I'm so sorry. Yesterday I behaved a bit rudely with you.” And then he gently clarified why he cancelled the program to me and to everyone.

He is a firm believer in preparation.

Four days before the event, he texted in the WhatsApp group, “Please come prepared for a run-through.” But we didn't. Later that evening, he texted, “We have very short time. We should have one full-fledged practice.” The organizers in the group affirmed to do a mock presentation the next day. But on the day before the event, when the professor texted “Are we meeting today?” all the organizers and many of the team members were absent. Each had different reasons for being absent that day. Except me. I went to his office. And that's when he told me, “I'm canceling this programme.”

His anger was pretty reasonable.

How?

In 2018, when I was in 8th-grade, my science teacher told me to take a seminar on crop production from the textbook. But she gave no time. There were two science hours on the same day: one before lunch and one after lunch. She told me at the end of the first hour that I had to take the seminar in the upcoming hour. I said okay. By the way, why did she choose me? Maybe because I used to answer her questions like Tobey Maguire in Spider-Man. But anyway, now I needed to make the seminar.

The next hour came. She called my name. I stood in front of the class. And with no preparation, I started the seminar. You know what I did?

*suspensive silence*

I just read the content line by line from the textbook. Paused for a moment. And instead of explaining what I had read, I started to read again. Repeated the same process. Once. Twice. Thrice. Until I saw my classmates chuckling at me. And the teacher told me, “Okay, okay, Go sit down. I'll explain it.” No doubt, it was one of the most shameful moments in my school life.

All because of one thing:

On-the-spot strategy.

So after 8 years, by cancelling the Bibliora inauguration, all my English professor wanted was to prevent such a shameful moment. “Without mock presentations,” he texted, “we can't go on stage and make a mockery.” I knew exactly what he meant by that.

So what did he actually want?

In 2023, when I was in 11th grade, I was chosen again to take a seminar. This time, it was by my chemistry teacher; on atomic structure. Unlike that crop production seminar, she told me to take it the next day, so I got a whole night to prepare!

I went home with fear and anxiety. Because the newly joined chemistry teacher was way stricter than the science teacher in 8th grade. Even in her very first class, she shouted like she was the principal of the school. So this time, the stakes were even higher. But I didn’t give up on myself. Instead of choosing on-the-spot strategy again, I put my heart and soul into preparation. I read the content from the textbook. Googled the terms and concepts I didn't know. Explained the whole thing to myself until I could understand it without looking it up. Roughly 5 hours of in-depth preparation!

I went to school the next day. The chemistry hour came. The teacher called my name. I stood in front of the class. And with enough preparation, I started the seminar. You know what happened?

*suspensive silence (again)*

By the time I finished the seminar, the whole class was standing, clapping, and shouting my name. I walked forward to my bench like I had won an Oscar. And that strict chemistry teacher was finally smiling in the class. No doubt, it was one of the most successful moments in my school life.

All because of one thing:

Preparation.

Yes, this is what my English professor believed in. He just wanted us to feel successful after the inauguration of Bibliora just like how I felt after finishing the seminar on atomic structure. That's why even after 80% of the work had been done, he cancelled the event. Because he didn't want us to choose on-the-spot strategy. He wanted preparation!

Now, you might think some people can do great work without preparation; it comes to them naturally. If you think like that, sorry to say, you are wrong.

No great work is without preparation.

You can be average. You can be worse. But if you want to master something and show up great, you definitely need preparation. There’s no shortcut.

But many people are too lazy to prepare. They put blind faith in God and choose on-the-spot strategy (like I used to do all the time)—without realizing that God is there to provide based on their efforts, not on their wishes.

Bottom line:

The greater the preparation, the greater the presentation.

And if you don't want to prepare at all, it's a better option to quit it altogether (like my English professor did), instead of making a mockery on the stage by choosing on-the-spot strategy (like I did for the seminar in my 8th-grade).

I was neither good at speaking nor at gaming. But I had some drawing skills. Since my childhood, I have spent most of my free time drawing. Scenery, cartoons, buildings. So with enough curiosity to become the next Jazza or Gawx Art, all I wanted was a channel with the name “A2 CREATiONS.” I know the name is dumb. But at that time, it meant everything to me.

I dialed my dad, who was working overseas, and happily revealed my YouTube dream to him, excitedly waiting for his appreciation and support.

But he did something worse than rejection.

He told me, “If you start a YouTube channel, you would be very successful. But there are people behind the screen looking for talented people. They would call you after seeing your videos and would compel you to work for them.”

At that time, I didn't know whether he was right. And I had no option other than believing him.

He didn't say okay. He didn't say no. He just planted an idea in my head and made me decide NO by myself. After I hung up the phone, I was very disappointed. All my excitement about starting and running a YouTube channel turned to dust.

Fast forward to 2026, I'm seeing a lot of successful YouTubers who had started 10 years ago. If my dad hadn't given me such a faulty opinion, with God's will, I would have been one of those YouTubers.

But no, no. I'm not throwing complete blame on him. As a responsible dad, he just didn't want his son to get distracted from academics and get trapped by the Internet's cheap gimmicks. He did his job. I just wish that he had done his job even better—by maybe letting me give it a safe try instead of fear-mongering the entire idea.

And just like my dad, most people influence others' decisions with a) opinion or b) advice.

Don't confuse them.

Let me give you simple examples to understand what opinion is and what advice is.

• If your neighbor who is a diehard football fan tells you how to become a footballer, it's an opinion.

• If Cristiano Ronaldo tells you how to become a footballer, it's advice.

Opinion comes from thinking. Advice comes from experience.

Anybody can think about football, but only some (like Ronaldo) have experience in football. And if you want to make the right decision in your football career, who would you follow? Obviously, Ronaldo.

And here's the thing: Sometimes, the opinion could also be the same as advice. Your neighbor could tell the same as Ronaldo.

That's where “faulty opinions” come in.

I classify opinions into two types:

1. Factual opinions

2. Faulty opinions

It's like tossing a coin. Either heads or tails: factual or faulty.

When my dad told me the consequences of starting a YouTube channel, he tossed a coin and it landed as faulty. When I planned to pursue my undergraduate degree in the UK, my uncle told me choosing abroad is a better option when you are pursuing post-graduation (specifically considering my situation at that time). Even though he never went abroad to pursue UG or PG, his opinion landed as factual.

Yeah, both my dad and my uncle were not sure whether they were right—because they didn't have any experience about it. They just tossed a coin hoping to get factual.

With all that being said, now you know which one to choose:

Advice from experienced ones.

Not opinions with a 50-50 chance of being factual.

Such experienced people should be your No. 1 priority. Because they are not tossing with hope; they know what they are speaking about. And yes, you should follow their advice even if it is hard to accept.

Two years ago, on July 8, I booked a bike taxi heading to a digital marketing company in Gopalapuram. It was for an interview.

During that time, my dad’s business was hitting rock bottom. He couldn’t even pay basic bills like house rent and mom’s medicine. His debt was piling up day by day. So I couldn't even imagine joining college. But still, as a responsible dad, he told me, “I will send you abroad with the help of an agency. They will take care of your college fees.”

I was anxious.

I didn't know what to do. I didn't want my dad to beg others for my academics.

And that's exactly when I saw that digital marketing company's opening on the Internshala app: a 6-month copywriting internship with a ₹5000 stipend. Wow!

I spent 3 full days and nights studying their website and rewrote their entire homepage copy to impress them in the interview—to land the internship.

Then came the day.

The bike taxi dropped me in front of the company. I went upstairs and met the founder. We shook hands and he told me to wait for a while. I was sitting on the most comfortable sofa in the most uncomfortable way, pressing my fingers on my palm out of nervousness. But I told myself attending this interview is far better than wasting my time at home doing nothing.

A few minutes later, the copywriter of the company came to the office. He sent an assignment to my email (yes, unexpected) to test my proficiency in copywriting.

You know what?

It was terrible!

Even while I was writing the assignment, I decided that I wouldn't get this internship.

When the copywriter looked at my assignment, he made a strong decision. He told me to sit in front of him and started asking some crucial questions. The biggest question was, “It's already July. Why haven't you joined college yet?” I felt ashamed to confess to my dad’s situation. So I needed to come up with a better excuse.

During the last two years of my school, I developed this belief: “College is a scam.” I was arguing with my classmates that we can become successful without having a degree. Thanks to faulty opinions by Andrew Tate and other Instagram “sigma” influencers.

Even before attending the interview, I had this silent boastful thought: “I'm going to an interview without any degree. Which means I was right. I'm going to become successful in my career without going to college.”

I thought this could be the better excuse.

So when the copywriter asked me about my college, I gave this sigma reply: “I'm looking for it. But I'm also considering a career path without college.”

What happened next?

I was sitting ashamed in front of young graduates running a digital marketing company. They looked at me like I was the dumbest person in the room. Sad fact: I was. This is the outcome of believing and following a faulty opinion.

After listening to my dumb answers, the copywriter did something very similar to my dad when I told him about my YouTube dream. He didn't say okay and give me the job. He didn't say no by shouting, “GET OUT!” He just kindly planted an idea in my head: “You need to go to college. Without a degree, you can't succeed in your career.”

But this time it's not a faulty opinion. Not even a factual opinion.

It's 100% pure advice.

Why?

Because the copywriter was not telling me how to become a footballer. He was telling me how to become like him. He had experience and he knew what he was speaking about. So I should follow him even though his advice didn't satisfy my belief (about college) and my current situation (of not being able to join college).

Now, two years later, I am studying in the same institution that the copywriter had studied. And I don't regret it. Because I followed advice, not a faulty opinion.

But here's a harsh reality:

Most people follow faulty opinions as if they are following advice.

Uh-oh.

Please don't forget this:

Opinions are cheap. Anybody can afford them. Anybody can toss them and hope them to be factual. Your neighbor can easily tell his opinions on how to become a footballer. It takes nearly zero effort. But advice? It's expensive. It takes more than a decade of hard work to become a global football star like Ronaldo.

Because of its cheapness, opinions are distributed like wildfire. Everyone has an opinion on everything. As a result, it's easy for us to get faulty opinions while making a decision. Of course, faulty opinions are going to keep coming to us throughout our lives. We can't simply turn them off permanently.

But the question is, “Are you going to follow them?”

I followed my dad’s faulty opinion about starting a YouTube channel and ended up losing an opportunity to learn high-value content creation skills. I believed a faulty opinion (“You can become successful without going to college”) and ended up facing shame in front of young graduates running a digital marketing company.

Not just me:

Yogesh, a friend of mine, joined a Visual Communication course in a well-known college in Chennai. He was told a faulty opinion: “You won't be studying much in VisCom. It will be very fun.” But now, he was studying hardcore and deeply regretting why he joined that college.

Faizal, another friend, went for an interview at a small-scale IT company. The employers treated him badly for not being good at English communication. Many of his college alumni, who were invited as guests, advised him to get better at speaking in English. But he made fun of them in the last row of the auditorium. And the rest is (sad) history.

Some of my school friends chose the Biology group without any computer-related subjects. But now in college, they are hitting their heads on the wall studying Data Science, Artificial Intelligence, and Computer Science Engineering—simply because they followed a series of faulty opinions.

So when somebody tells you something regarding your life or career decision, here's what you should do:

1. Look for their experience. If they say it from their own legitimate experience, then it's advice. Just follow them. No argument.

2. If they don't have legitimate experience, then it's an opinion. Just listen to them with respect and then ignore them. Don't follow them.

3. If you think their opinion is convincing and doubt whether it is factual, then verify it—with the words of those with experience.

It took me 5+ years of shameful, anxious, and regretful experiences in life to understand and write the above 3 points. So they are not my opinions. You can follow them without any hesitation.

And once again, if you get faulty opinions while making a decision...

Just don't follow them (even if they are coming from your beloved dad).

She spotted a mistake.

An hour ago, I went to the mill located three streets away. Mom had given me one bucket of chillies and one bucket of coriander seeds. Both should be mixed while grinding to get the powder with adequate spice. But I didn’t say that to the shopkeeper. He ground them individually.

I came home thinking I did my job well. But later, when my mom witnessed two different powders, she was upset. She wanted chilli + coriander powder. But I brought chilli powder and coriander powder. The former would be very spicy; the latter would be 0% spice. Both were not edible. Waste of time. Waste of money. Waste of chillies and coriander seeds. And no, we can't simply mix them up to rectify the mistake.

I realised how careless I was.

A few weeks ago, I lost a ₹1000-worth water bottle (after using it for only 2 months) which my dad brought from another country. During one weekend, when my family and I came back home after 4 hours, we found that the door was open; I hadn’t locked it properly. When I was 15, I let my 10-year-old cousin walk on the edge of the terrace wall; it takes only a few inches’ misstep to take his life—my aunt scolded me, saying that he is her only child.

Such incidents of my carelessness had started to overwhelm my mind as I was blaming myself.

My mom was more worried than me. She couldn’t stop blaming me for doing a bad job even in grinding masala.

I was sad.

A few hours later, she served the curry cooked with that wrongly-ground chilli powder. But you know what? It was tasty; not very spicy as expected. How? The chillies we bought that time were already less spicy. So even without coriander seeds, it tasted good.

Mom was awkwardly okay.

I was laughing.

Because if I were careful, and had told the shopkeeper to mix chillies and coriander seeds while grinding, the masala would have been tasteless.

Even though I made an irreversible mistake, it went fortunately well.

From that chilli powder, I learnt this crucial lesson:

Don't rush to blame. Every new mistake you spot in your life can be changed into good.

(Yeah, all those careless moments in my life had taught me something good that I can never learn the other way.)

So stop trying to be mistake-less. If you don't want to make any mistakes at all, then you have to be a malak. Because no human is apart from making mistakes. It's inevitable. And such a mindset (“I should not make any mistake”) is the reason why you rush to blame as soon as you spot a new mistake. Stop! Wait for a while. Look for ways to change the mistake into something good. And if you can't, then simply accept it and do not repeat the same mistake again.

As Epictetus would say, it's not about making mistakes; it's about how you react to them.

I believe they can.

According to Cultivation Theory, heavy social media usage can shape viewers' perception of reality. They would see the world through what they see on screen. And if the screen shows them something wrong, they would still consume it, believe it, and make a decision out of it.

Yeah, my teenage life is one of the examples.

I was studying in the 11th grade at that time. The word “Matrix” started to spread like fire among Gen Z in 2022. Most so-called sigma males were shouting the phrase, “Escape the Matrix!” Not because they wanted to spread awareness, but because they wanted to be on trend. They watched Iman Gadzhi. They read Rich Dad Poor Dad. They bought FREE digital guides on making money on Instagram.

I used to be one of those. The idea (“College is a scam” and “9–5 job is for the weak”) was polluting my mind, causing me to perceive my career without clarity.

• I didn't want to focus on studies

• I didn't want to join a college

• I didn't want to get a job

One bad decision after another.

Long story short, I wasted a whole year after completing school (instead of having any idea about joining college) as a result of believing this myth.

Later, I realised that the Matrix was not a message. It is a marketing tool. To sell their digital products in the backend by utilising the young minds’ unawareness. If not, where is it now? Where are those sigma preachers? Where are those online courses about dropshipping?

Of course, there are serious problems in the education and employment system. But that doesn’t mean you have to quit them altogether and put your career and life in danger. Just like I did.

Moral of the story:

Look beyond the screen and do NOT make a life decision out of social media trends.

Our Eid vibe was completely spoiled.

Why?

A few sanitation workers were standing downstairs, in front of our house, and demanded a “bonus donation” for Eid. The worst part is that they brought in new people (whom we had never seen working) to increase their earnings, and they also scolded me with harsh words for not meeting their expectations.

I was disturbed. Dad went upstairs and was accusing me of responding to them. He told me that I should have left the place instead of coming upstairs to get the money they had asked for. I argued that I couldn't. Mom and bro jumped into the argument. Chaos.

All because of one thing:

Asking the wrong way.

Of course, those sanitation workers struggle every day. Of course, they all face the terror of poverty. I respect them from the bottom of my heart. Their only mistake is: the way they asked. The approach.

The approach is not right for 2 big reasons:

1. They want more, not good

2. They don't respect the ones whom they ask

Their reason is 100% valid. But not their approach.

It's not just those sanitation workers in front of my house. There are many people who are always dependent on others' favour. Yes, not just in terms of money. They ask for others' effort. They ask for others' time. They ask for others' patience.

Why? Why are they always asking?

Obviously, it takes very, very little effort. All you need to do is ask. You earn money. You get the work done. You save your time.

I'm not saying asking for favours is completely wrong. In our daily lives, we all ask someone for a favour almost all the time. Asking your mom to cook breakfast. Asking your dad to take care of college fees. Asking your brother to buy groceries. Asking your friend to drop you off at home. And so on.

But when does asking for favours go wrong?

When it becomes “begging.”

And when we consider it as Plan A.

If begging is Plan A, we do it more. Again and again. For everything. At one point, our ask becomes too much: absurd, selfish, annoying, opportunistic, and disrespectful. That's not going to help anyone—neither the one who asks nor the one who gives.

“No doubt, a person should take a rope and proceed in the morning to the mountains and cut wood, then sell it, eat from this income, and give alms from it, rather than ask others for something.” — Prophet Muhammad ﷺ

So before you ask someone for a favour:

Pause.

Think critically.

And make sure whether you can manage without their favour.

Simply, make begging Plan Z. To increase your respect. To increase your value. To increase goodness in others.

Only if you can't do it yourself, go on with asking. And still, you need to ask them with respect. Don't beg like your life depends on it (because most of the time, it doesn't).

An app to connect readers with their local libraries for online lending. The reader will go to the app, check the catalog of books available from local libraries, choose the books they want to borrow, receive the books at their doorstep, and after the due date, the books will be collected from their doorstep.

When I told this idea to my friends and cousins, they were all impressed.

The fascinating thing about my idea was that nobody had really made it. There were apps to buy, sell, or rent books, but no one had ever built such an app that connects libraries with readers with a specific feature to lend/borrow periodically (I call it Librocycling).

But the problem was: I didn't know how to make it happen—as it was not just a business; it's a whole new category of business.

So I pirated ebooks about startups, marketing, category design, and brand positioning. I subscribed to YouTube channels like Slidebean, Starter Story, and Category Pirates. I followed multiple Instagram profiles including Foundr, Startup Archives, Naval Ravikant, and Entrepreneurs On IG. I tried to learn everything a newbie startup founder should learn from world-class, billion-dollar-worth startup founders.

I kept thinking about Librocycling. And the idea kept evolving day by day.

Several months later, in June 2025, I joined college and started studying digital journalism, which is completely irrelevant to building an online book lending app.

Then, after a few days, that day came...

Our cultural secretary came to my class and announced an inter-college competition which I was not expecting: Shark Tank! She said that 1–3 students from a class could participate in the competition. And we needed to pass the audition that was going to happen the next day before pitching on the main stage.

I went home. Spent the whole night designing the pitch deck and reinforcing my startup idea.

The next day, after college, I went to the audition (yes, as an individual, not as a team). Three professors from our department acted as a panel of Sharks. Fortunately, I was the third person to pitch. So I got a chance to look at two full pitches of two startup ideas. But they weren't quite interesting to me. One was a multi-faceted digital marketing news agency. The other was cold storage hubs for food cultivated in remote places. I thought my idea was unique, impressive, and valuable. And I was right.

Finally, after an hour, I was going to pitch. But what happened next was something that I never expected.

After completing my pitch, the Sharks threw back-to-back logical questions about the idea. And I had no proper answers to anything.

“How will you price each lend/borrow?”

“What if there are no libraries nearby—do they need to pay even more to borrow from distant areas?”

“Why should I spend money to get the books at the doorstep when I can go to the nearby library and borrow them myself with almost no cost?”

For all the questions and criticisms, I simply said, “I need to work on that” and “Yeah, you are right.” I didn't negotiate because I couldn't. I was standing like an innocent person who was falsely sentenced guilty in court. Couldn't argue. Couldn't demand.

Just a few minutes ago, I was thinking that my idea was valuable. But now, I felt like it was garbage.

At that audition is when I realised: Value is NOT in ideas.

No matter how unique the idea is, no matter how impressive it seems, no matter how long you think about that idea, if there is no execution...

Then the idea is nothing but crap!

Yes. Reading those books, watching those YouTube videos, and consuming those reels and carousels are not execution at all. It's just education.

With that 0% execution, I didn't even know how much I was going to price for the Librocycle service. Stupid! I just fantasised about building a startup to extract as much dopamine as possible. I did nothing else.

Therefore, all those sleepless nights of thinking about Librocycling were just procrastination from what needed to be done. That's why I didn't succeed. Don't be like me.

Value is not in ideas—it’s in execution. – Jay Yang

The previous day, she told us to memorise the trigonometry formulas; but the problem was that we never remembered that she did. The majority of us weren't aware of this dreadful homework. When she came to the class and asked about it, we simply said that we didn't memorise.

That's when she shouted.

Most of my classmates and I went downstairs to the corridor. It was the busiest and most “public” spot of the school. The spot where the school's main office was located, where the principal, the correspondent, parents, teachers, non-teaching staff, and students of all classes from kindergarten to higher secondary would wander around.

We knelt down at that spot. For the whole hour. While listening to our math teacher's absurd scoldings.

It's already a big trauma. And then came the correspondent. She added, “What are your parents doing in homes instead of taking care of you?”

I was very upset.

Why should we face this much humiliation and punishment? While pedophiles are billionaires, while genociders are prime ministers, we are being questioned, humiliated, and punished for simply not memorising a few stupid formulas.

What's wrong with my math teacher and the correspondent?

They were not intentionally evil. They just followed a wrong ideology of teaching. They just confused obedience with rightness. They believed: If a student follows the command, he is a good student; and if a student doesn't follow the command, he is a bad student. But if that logic is reasonable, then those IDF soldiers are good soldiers for following the command to pull the trigger 335 times to kill Hind Rajab.

If there's no opposition to the command even when it is wrong, then it's not only obedience. It's fascism.

• Can't question the school's circular?

• Can't disagree with the teacher's opinions?

• Can't argue with authorities when they are wrong?

Then you are not in a school; you are in a fascism facility. Most of us across the world are in such places (schools, colleges, workplaces) all the time.

Especially in schools, every child learns these 2 non-academic lessons (indirectly) throughout their school life:

1. How to oppress someone

2. How to be oppressed by someone

While kneeling in the corridor, we subconsciously learnt both. Indirect, yet apparent.

You know the saying monkey see, monkey do? From that, we can understand: People, especially children, learn from what they see more than from what you say to them. If you scold a child to eat, he first learns to scold, then to eat. That's how it works.

Now tell me, what students often see in schools?

They see teachers yelling and punishing for speaking and not completing homework. They see other class teachers treat their classes badly. They see sanitation workers being humiliated by other staff. They see their parents (who pay the fees) being questioned and submissive in front of school management.

Even if students learn good manners in the book, they often don't see them in action.

All they see is fascism in its softest form.

Most people believe schools raise a disciplined generation; and to achieve such discipline, they should be very strict. Such belief seems convincing. But it has its own consequences.

According to a longitudinal study by psychologists Ming-Te Wang and Sarah Kenny, strict discipline often backfires.

Their research found that “harsh parental verbal discipline did not lessen or eliminate the manifestation of adolescent conduct problems, but rather increased conduct problems and depressive symptoms over time.” In simple terms, strict punishment doesn’t automatically create disciplined children. Often, it only leaves them more rebellious, more frustrated, and more emotionally hurt.

Even if we look around the world, we can find students committing serious crimes like theft, murder, and even rape at such a young age without any remorse.

If schools are meant to be disciplining students, then why are such juvenile crimes increasing day by day? Because schools often teach fascism, not kindness. Not respect. Not rightness. Their underground curriculum is How to Oppress and How to Be Oppressed (both facilitate the fascism ideology).

So as an individual, we should stop associating obedience with rightness.

• Being obedient to someone in higher authority doesn't necessarily mean you are being right. Because such higher authority (unlike God or prophets) would stand against rightness and still want you to be oobedient. Like the commanders of the IDF.

• And on the other hand, don't become fascist yourself. If you are in a higher position, don't expect people to strictly do whatever you command. You are not building disciplined people, but a rebellious, frustrated, and emotionally hurt ones.

So be aware.

Don't obey people. Obey what is right.

Don't expect people to obey you. Let them obey what is right.

My dad is a failed businessman.

He used to be self-employed in Saudi Arabia for more than 20 years. And with that experience, he started a digital printing company three years ago.

He rented a shop. Dumped the old machinery he already had.

And then he got stuck with the first bottleneck:

Having zero capital.

For marketing. For the security deposit. For the big printing machine worth ₹13,000,000.

So he searched for investors through people he already knew. After several months, he got one who was willing to invest with the agreement to share 40% of the profits every month. Good news. He started the pre-launch grinding. Promised a payment date for the vendors. And the company was officially incepted.

Then came the second bottleneck:

Having an unreliable investor.

That man promised to pay one day, but he paid half the money the next month. Not once, but in every round of investments. He didn't even invest in the big printing machine. So the burdens of running the company (and the family) were piling up on my dad’s head.

So without any investments, everything became debt.

• Shop rent

• Home rent

• Water & food

• Electricity bill

• My school fee

• My bro's college fee

• My mom's medical fee

• And the list goes on and on

My dad had to pay all the expenses without making a single penny of income a day. He asked for money from almost everyone in his contacts. And the debts were only adding up, which he never knew how he would pay back.

One night, while reciting Surah Ash-Sharh in the Fajr prayer, his voice was trembling. He couldn’t control his tears. He cried out of pain. Regret. And shame. I think, at that specific moment, he could have felt like he was the worst businessman. The worst father. The worst husband.

But no. He didn't give up.

He somehow got the company running. He gave his very best to get as many clients as he could, and to make as much money as possible from the resources he already had. And with God's mercy, he managed to take care of our family too. He didn't become a scammer. He didn't become tightfisted. He didn't become a scapegoat for evil banks.

And now as I'm writing this, after all these years of chrometophobia, we are still facing the same financial crisis. A few days of growth. And a week full of suffering. The cycle repeats again and again.

But now the question is:

He seems like a victim. Then, why did I call my dad a failed businessman? What mistake did he make other than trusting a person who promised to be trustworthy?

According to the founders of Basecamp, my dad made two BIG mistakes:

1. He relied on outside money like it's Plan A

2. He worried about luxuries on day one

Without any savings in the bank account and without any source of fixed income, he started a company. Completely relied on one particular investor—who later didn't pick up calls when the money was urgently needed. Wow. The first BIG mistake.

And the next BIG mistake? Even after getting half the money quite late, he didn't invest it in profitable necessities—like marketing, employing good labor, or saving up the money for bigger investments later. Instead, he put that money into cheap luxuries—like furniture, demo work, decorations, and additional PC setup. He believed they would somehow drive growth, but the opposite is what happened.

In one line: He relied on outside money to spend on luxuries—which he didn't need on day one.

And for making such BIG mistakes (without even realizing it), he suffered a lot. In fact, our whole family suffered a lot.

So with my dad as an example, please be aware. Please be aware of what and who you rely upon. Please be aware of where you spend your time, energy, and money on day one.

Make this hard choice (that my dad didn't make):

“Build the necessities now, worry about the luxuries later.” — Rework, by the founders of Basecamp

But now, I'm not using Instagram at all.

It's been more than six months since I deleted Instagram. And I'm still okay. Didn't become a maniac.

But most people believe they can't spend a day without going to Instagram, scrolling Reels, and liking Stories. It conquers a big portion of their daily life, followed by sleeping, eating, and peeing.

Now, the question is:

Why do you actually use Instagram every day?

• You might say, “Because I want to connect with people.” But you are not even speaking to your friend sitting next to you (as that fellow is also busy scrolling)

• You might say, “Because I want to know what happens around the world.” But you are not showing up to protests happening two streets away demanding justice (for yourself too)

• You might say, “Because I want to be entertained.” But you are also giving silly excuses like ‘I don't have time’ when you are told to do something valuable (e.g., journaling or reading books)

Then, what's the real BIG reason?

Why do you actually use Instagram every day?

One word: Acknowledgment.

You use Instagram every day because you want others to appreciate you.

That's not completely evil. But you also need to consider the consequences of being a person who always craves attention, acceptance, and applause—I would like to call such people Digital Narcissists.

“We check our phones hoping for a hit of dopamine.” — Simon Sinek

With every Instagram post, they are boosting their boasting ability.

• A Note with a romantic song = They are boasting that they are capable of having a relationship

• A Story of going to a mall and eating at an Italian restaurant = They are boasting about their luxurious lifestyle

• A Reel showing their (fake) empathy toward a homeless person = They are boasting about their so-called good character

I came across an intriguing question that goes…

“If you couldn't tell people you climbed Everest, would you still climb it?”

That slapping question made me contemplate why we share what we share online.

In the context of Instagram, if you couldn't upload a Story of yourself reading a book, would you still read it? If you couldn't upload a Reel of yourself standing in front of the gym mirror, would you still work out every day?

Many people don't.

They just do everything to show off.

Their purpose of reading Can’t Hurt Me is not to learn how to master their minds, but to earn a like from their school bully. Their purpose of going to the gym is not to get in good shape, but to get their crush DM-ing them with a fire emoji.

Okay. Now, let me go a little deeper into what’s wrong about overusing Instagram.

• The more you use Instagram, the more you seek acknowledgement.

• The more you seek acknowledgement, the more you set faulty expectations about life. About people. About yourself.

• And the more you set faulty expectations, the worse the quality of your life becomes. Obviously.

Now you can understand the real BIG reason why we use Instagram.

And the fact is: you don't need research papers from PubMed. Even your conscience knows.

So, what should you do?

Just understand the truth about Instagram: what it makes you feel, why you want to post something, and what Mark Zuckerberg really wants from you. If you clearly understand the reality, you know how to use it and most importantly, how not to use it.

“Clarity about what matters provides clarity about what does not.” — Cal Newport

Go read the books Deep Work and Digital Minimalism by Cal Newport. He explained the art of using social media (for the better) in detail: what to use, when to use, and how to use. They are quite hard-read though. But the outcomes you get by applying those books would make your life easier in the long-term.

So just do it!

And it worked. Almost every time.

For example, here are 3 worst incidents in my career—in which I used positivity to keep going:

1. Failed to make my mom happy with my 10th class final exam result. She hoped for 450+ out of 500, but I scored only 381. Her innocent hesitation while telling my scores to the relatives on the phone was like a slipper slap on my face. Though I cried under the pillow at midnight, I became positive the next morning. I kept going.

2. Went to an interview for a copywriting internship with a monthly ₹2000 stipend. Meanwhile, my dad was at rock bottom. He couldn’t pay the rent. He couldn’t pay my college admission fee. He couldn’t buy my mom dentures, as all her upper teeth had decayed and been removed. As a son, I wanted to help my dad and my family. And that's exactly when I got rejected in the interview. My whole self-confidence fell apart. I felt like I'm the most unworthy person in the world. But with positivity, I kept going instead of jumping off the terrace.

3. Attended a Shark Tank competition in college with two of my classmates. They introduced the idea of our startup. And when it was my turn to explain the USP, I grabbed the mic and blabbered a few words. Then I simply stood in front of the judge and my competitors without knowing what to say. My mind switched off. The entire hall was silent, waiting for me to speak, while I was setting a record for The Most Embarrassing Moment in My Career. After somehow ending my part, the shame haunted me for the whole day. Again, positivity healed me.

From the above three incidents, we can say that positivity always helps in survival, right?

Wrong.

My friend Rayyan once explained an intriguing idea in school, and I still remember it to this day. Which is: Positive thinking can kill you.

Rayyan gave a scenario of a soldier standing behind a wall. The lone soldier needs to go to the other wall, but in the middle, enemies are waiting to pull the triggers to kill him. If he thinks positively, he would just run towards the other wall, saying to himself, “Everything will be fine,” and he might get killed with a high chance. BUT if the soldier prepares for the worst, he would think critically to find some other rational ways to escape, which would increase his chances of survival.

Yeah, Rayyan made sense.

I kept thinking about that for a long time.

And here's what I understood:

Positivity for the past heals. Positivity for the future kills.

The three incidents of mine on positive thinking are about the past. I chose positivity after crying under the pillow. I chose positivity after getting rejected in the interview. I chose positivity after feeling embarrassed that I was stuttering on the stage.

But to avoid scoring badly in the upcoming exams, to avoid getting rejected in the upcoming interviews, and to avoid performing badly at the upcoming presentations, I should NOT choose positivity.

Because when I think positively about the future, I would overlook the pitfalls. The drawbacks. The worst cases.

“Expecting things to be bad is the best way to be pleasantly surprised when they’re not.” — Morgan Housel

I think now you get the point.

Positivity does help in survival. But not always.

It might prevent you from making stupid decisions after facing a failure. Maybe dulling your suicidal thoughts. But it won’t help you prevent making stupid decisions before facing a failure—in fact, thinking positively about the future itself can be a stupid decision.

I thought positively while studying for the 10th grade final exam. I thought positively while rewriting their website copy to stand out in the interview. I thought positively while waiting for our lot number to be called to pitch next on the stage. All without thinking critically. All without preparing for the worst.

As a result, those three incidents acquired top-tier positions among the worst things that happened in my life. No wonder.

I was right by choosing positivity after I had failed (for the past). I was wrong by choosing positivity before I even got to the place (for the future).

Your positivity doesn’t change the fact that you are inefficient at something. Can an untrained junior pilot who skipped the morning drill say, “Everything will be fine, don't think negatively,” before taking the plane? He shouldn't, right? He needs to prepare for the worst instead of blindly taking things positively—because such positive thoughts can kill him, his co-pilot, air hostesses, and hundreds of passengers.

“Optimism is often a failure to properly account for risk.” — Annie Duke

So here’s the principle:

When considering the past, choose a positive reaction.

When considering the future, choose critical thinking.

See? I don't use the word “positive thinking” at all.

Yes, there's a BIG difference between critical and negative thinking. And yes, I was right when I said positive words to myself after the three worst incidents. I survived with positivity. I evolved with positivity.

Then, what mistake did I make?

I was always positive. Not only after worst incidents.

Before going to the interview, I must have thought critically and prepared for the worst—instead of saying to myself: “Don’t worry, you’ll win.”

• What are the possible reasons to get rejected in the interview?

• What are the basic skills I need (to get this internship) but don’t have?

• What if they don’t like my prework—the website copy I had rewritten for hours (though they didn’t ask for it)?

If I had the answers to the above questions, either I could’ve worked better to land the internship or could've known what to do next if I didn't make it. The same principle goes for the other two worst incidents.

And of course, even if you prepare for the worst…

You still might end up failing.

That’s the hardest truth about life.

But how you react to such failures and how you can win by thinking critically in the next try are what make the game fair enough to keep playing.

With all that being said, let me conclude this essay with a quick summary:

Being always positive can kill you. You need to react positively (while considering the past) and think critically (while considering the future).

In one line: React positively, think critically.

As I was a child when the conflict happened, I don’t know the whole story. And I never asked my dad what really happened. But sometimes, when we sit together for lunch or breakfast, my dad’s conversation ends up reflecting the bad things that happened to him because of his very own brother.

Of course, I still don’t know who was actually wrong in the story.

And I think I will never have to.

Because everything changed on the evening of 22nd Nov 2021.

The previous day, 21st Nov, around 5:15 a.m., I had woken up to the bad news of my grandma’s demise. I call her Vaapma (meaning dad’s mom in Tamil), and she is the only grandparent with whom I have the most memories.

Worst part? I was not with her when she died. She was in my native village, Udangudi, at one of my other uncles’ homes, 693 km away. So after the news of her demise, we here in Chennai had to travel the whole day to attend the funeral there the next day. A long stretch of bus travel in the morning and another long stretch of bus travel in the evening.

After 15 hours of travelling, I was standing next to the mortuary freezer box at 12 a.m., looking at my Vaapma, weeping, and recollecting the memories of her.

But 15 hours later, on the evening of 22nd Nov, I was very happy. In fact, the whole family was happy.

Why?

We all gathered in one room—including that uncle with whom there was a conflict—and made a mutual promise of forgiveness.

Because that’s what my Vaapma used to long for when she was alive.

She raised 5 boys together. But after they grew up and got married, she saw them fighting for money. She saw them betraying each other for their own new families. She saw them not being united even when it came to taking care of her. But during her last days, the boys individually had witnessed the longing in their mother’s eyes. The pain she had gone through for decades. The promise she wanted the boys to make before she died.

Yes. All she wanted was to see her children standing together as one. What else would a mother expect on her deathbed?

And that evening, even before her body decomposed in the soil, it happened. They all stood together. They all forgave each other for everything. I think taking that big family photograph in the backyard is the happiest post-funeral event that happened in the world.

Since then, we have been happily talking with that uncle’s family. We have been happily visiting each other frequently. To the point that my dad started to miss his younger brother (whom he used to avoid for more than a decade).

And yeah, my dad still remembers every bad thing that his brother did to him. How can he simply forget everything in one evening that he used to remember for years? It simply can’t happen.

Then what changed the story?

What resolved their conflict?

Forgiveness.

(NOTE: I’m not saying that you should always be submissive when someone does an injustice to you. The point is: either have a constructive fight demanding justice or genuinely forgive. This essay mainly talks about resolving close relationship conflicts, not Epstein- or Vachathi-like crimes.)

Most people, when they want to resolve relationship conflicts, tend to choose forgetting instead of forgiving.

Before resolving, before reuniting:

• They want to forget the pain

• They want to forget the shame

• They want to forget every bad thing that happened in the past

But the quicker they want to forget, the longer they remember. In psychology, it is called the Ironic Process Theory—the more you try not to think about something, the more you’re going to think about it.

So here’s the thing:

You may not forget the wound. But you can forgive the one who made it.

Look at the words: For-get. For-give.

• Forgetting is external. An unintentional process. At the beginning, I said that I forgot the faces of my uncle’s family. But did it happen by constantly and consciously trying to forget them? No. I forgot them because I got them.

On the other hand...

• Forgiving is internal. An intentional process. You willingly take the steps to give it. That’s what my dad and uncles did. They said, “Let's forgive each other,” not “Let's forget every bad thing.” And that’s what made us reunite even after a decade seamlessly.

Forgiving works. It works for every relationship, for almost every problem. The most popular and obvious hack (yet hardly used).

I know forgiving is a hard choice. Especially when the other person doesn’t apologise. But still, you can do it anyway—and yield happiness out of it (just like my dad yielded happiness by forgiving his brother).

So to resolve relationship conflicts, don’t try to forget what happened, and don’t wait for someone’s death to forgive.